Editorial Review

Reviews

The State of (Some) Things: Space, The Mind, The Earth, November 4, 2010

Unexceptional - A Dull Collection, November 6, 2010

Gets Fluffier Every Year - Still Great, October 23, 2010
This book was predictably good. It should be - after all, it contains a select group (26) out of the 122 articles that passed the scrutiny of the series editor. I look forward to this book every year as well as its competitor "Best American Science Writing 2010." This year the Introduction by Freeman Dyson is perhaps the best in all the years I've been reading this series. He explains why this series and the other are getting fluffier (my word), then says that science journalism in general is getting "briefer, sparser, and more superficial." He conveniently puts the table of contents into broad categories: Cosmology, Neurology replacing Molecular Biology, Natural Beauty, and three categories about the Environment. Then in describing the content in broad strokes and mentioning a few specific articles, he proceeds to write a summary essay with his own opinions about his chosen articles - creating a stand-alone essay of his own. However, his choices ARE light on hard science and for that I considered subtracting a point - upon further thought I did not - but I refuse to believe Dyson could not have found more scientific selections. The first three articles I review were found in both volumes - all three among my own favorites, as I have marked by asterisks:

* "The Missions of Astronomy" by Steven Weinberg - Weinberg is a Nobel Prize winner and particle physics expert (currently at UT Austin) who decided he was not current in the history of science - so he decided to teach a course in it. This article looks to be adapted from one of his lectures. He starts out explaining how the ancients used the gnomon - similar to but not the same as a sundial. A gnomon is a vertical pole on a flat, level patch of ground open to the sun's rays. Daily charting of its shadow by Greeks led to "a discovery around 430 BC that was to trouble astronomers for two thousand years: the four seasons, whose beginnings and endings are precisely marked by the solstices and equinoxes, have slightly different lengths. This ruled out the possibility that the sun travels around the earth (or the earth travels around the sun) with constant velocity in a circle." It was not until the 17th century that Kepler explained that the earth's orbit is not a circle but an ellipse. A scientific reading of "Odyssey" reveals that Homer could accurately navigate by reading the stars and Weinberg explains how he did it. On a ship in the Mediterranean a sea captain explained to Weinberg how ship navigators used celestial methods until only recently - now replaced by GPS. The captain lamented that the younger captains don't know how to use a sextant and a chronometer.

But astronomy also experienced an overestimation of its usefulness. Much of the royal support for compiling tables of astronomical data in the medieval and early modern periods was motivated by widespread reliance on astrology. Many scientists, including Ptolemy and Newton were heavily into astrology. Weinberg closes by taking a swipe at NASA's wasteful program of manned spaceflight - cherished by NASA's funding and PR department but terribly cost-inefficient compared to unmanned projects. "All the satellites like Hubble or COBE or WMAP or Planck that have made possible the recent progress in cosmology have been unmanned."

* "A Life of its Own" by Michael Specter - "Scientists have been manipulating genes for decades - inserting, deleting, changing them in various microbes has become a routine function in thousands of labs." Now they are attempting to manufacture drugs and chemicals from entirely synthetic genes, analogous to a software designer rearranging loops of code for a new purpose. Artemisinin is key in treating malaria but the herb that creates it is difficult to produce by cultivation. Jay Keasling et al inserted genes from 3 organisms into E. coli with the idea of making that bacteria produce artemisinin. Within a decade his company figured out how to make the bacteria increase its production by a factor of a million, bring a course of treatment from $10 to $1. The scientific response has been reverential but Keasling is baffled by opposition to what should soon become the world's most reliable source of cheap artemisinin. Opposition comes from farmers of the herb and from the same groups that call genetically engineered food "Frankenfood."

Specter discusses the ethics of the era of biological engineering - peppered with suggestions that the E coli that makes a malarial drug could also make biofuels or (substitute your favorite product). To be brought up to date on this subject, this fascinating article is hard to beat.

* "The Sixth Extinction" by Elizabeth Kolbert - Of the many species that have existed on earth over 99% have disappeared. There have been at least 20 mass extinctions on earth with 5 stand outs known as the "Big Five" - but extinction has been a contested concept. Until recently the view that "God created species fixed for all eternity" prevailed. Then in 1812 Frenchman Cuvier wrote an essay featuring the absence of mastodons, whose bones littered two continents, saying, "Life on this earth has often been disturbed by dreadful events....Innumerable living creatures have been victims of these catastrophes." The English edition included an introduction suggesting Cuvier's idea proved Noah's flood. Darwin embraced the idea of extinctions but didn't believe they were caused by catastrophes. Kolbert says, "Mass extinctions strike down the fit and the unfit at once....it takes millions of years for life to recover and when it does it generally has a new cast of characters....It is now generally agreed among biologists that another mass extinction is under way."

Extinctions of large mammals and birds have repeatedly happened shortly after the arrival of humans. This has happened in North America, South America, New Zealand, Australia, Madagascar, Hawaii, and many other locations. It happens as a result of hunting, burning, farming, logging, building, water diversion, atmospheric pollution - in general, habitat destruction. As Kolbert painstakingly demonstrates, it is now happening to frogs. They are dying of a fungus spread by doctors. A related fungus appears to be decimating the bat population.
Somewhere toward the end of the article, Kolbert tells the familiar story of the Yucatan peninsula meteor that killed off dinosaurs 65 million years ago. For this Sixth Extinction though, the perpetrator walks upright.

* "The Believer" by Andres Corsello - Memoir about Elon Musk, the genius who was reading 8-10 hours a day by the time he was 10 years old. He learned how to program software on his own and sold his first company, a media software company for $307 Million. Next he developed a company that morphed into Paypal that he sold to Ebay for $1.5 billion. He's the CEO of Tesla, maker of the first all-electric sports car. He's the chairman and controlling shareholder of SolarCity, turning the company into one of the nation's biggest installer of solar panels. He created the company SpaceX, whose short-term goal is to commercialize orbital rocketry but whose long-term goal is a mission to Mars and beyond. He is the vision guy, the money guy, the marketing guy, the engineering guy and the software guy all wrapped into one - not meaning he does all these things singlehandedly but he can talk shop with the hundreds of experts of all types he employs. The reason he is included by Dyson is probably this: They both believe humanity on earth will end - if not by our own self annihilation, by the explosion of a caldera or a direct hit by a huge meteor. He feels his life's work is extending the lifespan of human life itself.

"One Giant Leap to Nowhere" by Tom Wolfe - It is almost a concensus view among cosmologists that manned spaceflight is far too expensive and that unmanned robotic spaceflight is the way to go. Dyson disagrees as does this author, both of whom believe Congress lacks the proper vision necessary for what should be NASA's real purpose - manned spaceflight.

"Cosmic Vision" by Timothy Ferris - A fascinating survey of the telescopes around the world that have illuminated our understanding of the universe. The largest ones have mirrors up to 10 meters in diameter, but "tomorrow's enormous telescopes will do as much in one night as today's do in a year."

* "Seeking New Earths" by Timothy Ferris - Nowadays, new planets orbiting stars other than our own are found every week. The goal is to find one in the "goldilocks zone" - one just far enough from its sun to be the right temperature. Of course, it also has to have other characteristics that would make it habitable for life "as we know it." Ferris says this is like trying to find a "firefly in a fireworks display" or "listening for a cricket in a tornado," but as techniques and telescopes improve, there probably will be billions to choose from.

* "Don't!" by Jonah Lehrer - By testing 4 year olds' ability to delay gratification (postpone eating 1 marshmallow in order to get 2), psychologists can predict, with a high degree of certainty, that the kids who can hold out for the second marshmallow will do better in life. Furthermore, for those who can't delay their gratification - they can be trained. Turns out it's not just about marshmallows - it's also about saving for retirement. The author believes learning self-control is nothing if not early cognitive training. "We should give marshmallows to every kindergartner," he says. "We should say, `You see this marshmallow? You don't have to eat it. You can wait. Here's how'"

* "Out of the Past" by Kathlene McGowan - "Instead of being a perfect movie of the past...memory is more like a shifting collage, a narrative spun out of scraps and constructed anew whenever recollection takes place...reactivating a memory destabilizes it, putting it back into a flexible, vulnerable state." Called reconsolidation, "old memory is actually changed as it is recalled." Put another way, memory and imagination are not that different and even happen in the same circuits of the brain.

* "Brain Games" by John Colapinto - "In a specialty [behavioral neurology] that today relies chiefly on the power of multi-million dollar imaging machines to peer deep inside the brain, [Vilayanur] Ramachandran is known for his low-tech methods, which often involves little more than interviews with patients and a few hands-on tests - an approach that he traces to his medical education in India in the 70's when expensive diagnostic machines were scarce." His first paper was published in "Nature" when he was 20 and in medical school. With only his powers of observation and a simple test, using his fellow students as subjects, he discovered some previously unknown features about stereoscopic vision. With four aquariums, some coral reef flounders, and testing he devised, he "effectively ended the debate on flounder camouflage." His best known work involves his work with neuroplasticity and "mirror therapy" with phantom limb pain, which afflicts up to 90% of amputees. Ending with speculations about schizophrenia and autism, this is a captivating article.

"The Alpha Accipiter" by Gustave Axelson - Northern goshawks hunt by executing surgical strikes in thick woods - weaving among the trees, flying at speeds up to fifty-five miles an hour. They lose their acrobatic flight advantage beyond the forest edge.

"Flight of the Kuaka" by Don Stap - The bar-tailed godwit takes the longest nonstop migratory flight documented for any bird. "The flight is nonstop, no food, no water, no sleep as we know it, flying for eight days." In the days preceding this migration from Alaska to New Zealand, the bird gorges itself on marine invertebrates and doubles its weight. Its intestine and gizzard shrink, leaving more room to store fat. The scientists that implanted radio transmitters and followed the flights could barely believe it. They thought the birds did it following the coastline with frequent stops.

* "Modern Darwins" by Matt Ridley - Although Darwin had to guess on many of the particulars of evolution, he was remarkably accurate. Today's scientists don't have to guess - evidence of each living organism's pathway to its current state of being is scattered throughout its DNA - "They consult genetic scripture." The evolution of change turns out not to be due to gene changes but in the regulation of these genes - switches at either end of the genes that turn them on or off. The core genes that control basic metabolic processes are remarkably constant whether you're an earthworm or a Nobel Prize winner. This discovery "overturned a long-held notion that the acquisition of limbs required a radical evolutionary event....the genetic machinery necessary to make limbs was already present in fins....it involved the redeployment of old genetic recipes in new ways."

* "The Superior Civilization" by Tim Flannery - This is a book review on Edward O. Wilson's and Bert Holldobler's brilliant book about ants. An ant colony is a "superorganism" whose individual ants and groups of ants function somewhat like the cells and organs in our bodies to create a single functional unit. Coordination within the unit "occurs through ant communication systems that are extraordinarily sophisticated and are the equivalent of the human nervous system." Here's a unique bit of ant trivia: "....exploring ants count their steps to determine where they are in relation to home. This remarkable ability was discovered by researchers who lengthened the legs of ants by attaching stilts to them. The stilt-walking ants, they observed, became lost on their way home to the nest at a distance proportionate to the length of their stilts."

"Still Blue" by Kenneth Brower - A mature blue whale is the largest life entity that has ever existed on earth and weighs more than the entire NFL. It was almost hunted to extinction until it gained international protection in the 60's. Our author accompanies a group of scientists who tag and track the blue whales who spend their winter near Costa Rica.

"The Lazarus Effect" by Jane Goodall - The Lord Howe Island stick insect is about the size of a large cigar. It existed on only one island on earth until 1918 when a ship brought rats to the island. The rats thought they were delicious. Thought to be extinct since 1920, a group of rock climbers found some specimens that managed to escape to a single bush on a volcanic rock 14 miles from Howe's island. They painstakingly captured enough to replenish the species in several zoos around the world. In her second story an American woman discovered and rescued a very small and beautiful breed of horse from obscurity and extinction in Iran. After extensive testing these horses proved to be Caspian horses, the ancestors of the Arabian horse.

"Darwin's First Clues" by David Quammen - It is a widely accepted view that Darwin, after his voyage on the "Beagle," developed his theory of evolution over the next decade or so. Quammen makes the case that he formulated much of his theory during the voyage. In the process, we are treated to a view of his journey that concentrates less on the Galapagos and more on South America.

"All You Can Eat" by Jim Carrier - Shrimp are "a perfect protein delivery system." Fat and happy shrimpers made a killing until the 80's when catches flattened worldwide. Eventually, the supply was replenished but not from the sea. Shrimp farms took over but proved to be incredibly dirty and harmful to the environment. As a result, shrimp farms are banished to 3rd world countries whose inhabitants would get rid of them if they only could - meanwhile, their biggest client is Red Lobster restaurant.

"A Formula For Disaster" by Felix Salmon - In 2000, Wall Street "quant" (mathematical guru specializing in creating new financial products) David Li came up with a breakthrough formula that "made it possible for traders to sell vast quantities of new securities, expanding financial markets to unimaginable levels. Eventually his formula was instrumental in causing the unfathomable losses that brought the world financial system to its knees.

"Not So Silent Spring" by Dawn Stover - A blackbird was terrorizing the neighborhood, imitating ambulance sirens, car alarms, and sounds of the city. Beluga whales are changing their calls or switching them to new frequencies because underwater noise from ships have increased about tenfold. Some species that are unable to adapt are suffering precipitous declines in population.

* "The Catastrophist" by Elizabeth Kolbert - The author bolsters the case for human-induced climate change, featuring the work of James Hansen - sometimes called the "father of global warming." This article is perfect for a short primer on the problem and the difficult politics making solutions challenging. There is broad agreement among scientists that coal represents the most serious threat but there is no aspect the author leaves out. The United States stands alone in having a major political party that refuses to acknowledge that humans are the cause of this problem and must provide the solution if there is to be one.

"Scraping Bottom" by Robert Kunzig - The oil sands industry is transforming the economy and the ecology of Northeastern Alberta, Canada. Because of Alberta's tremendous oil reserves, the United States now gets more oil from Canada than from any other nation. Though it's destroying their environment, even the Indians have mixed feelings - it's making them employed and rich. I've been expecting a good article about this topic for years and this is it.

* "Purpose-Driven Life" by Brian Boyd - Early man was quite superstitious and many of the superstitions were retained as the major religions took form. In recent centuries, science found natural causes for earthly events and many of the gods retreated to gaps left unexplained, especially when Darwin's theory suggested that humans, too, could have emerged without supernatural help. Some have thought that the idea of evolution leaves mankind without meaning or purpose but our author disagrees. This is an excellent article, featuring the comment by Stephen J. Gould that if we could rewind and replay the tape of evolution, humans and human intelligence would not reappear.

"The Monkey and the Fish" by Phillip Gourevitch - When self-made American Millionaire Greg Carr was not yet forty he decided to devote the rest of his life to philanthropy - to causes he could pour himself into, body and soul. After a few fits and starts he settled on the preservation of what used to be one of the top safari parks in Africa: Gorongosa National Park at the southern tip of the Great Rift Valley in Mozambique. The title of this selections comes from a story (from the point of view of the indigenous villagers) that illustrates how difficult it is to salvage an ecostructure and still treat the indigenous peoples fairly: "A monkey was walking along a river and saw a fish in it. The monkey said, Look, that animal is under water, he'll drown, I'll save him. He snatched up the fish and in his hand the fish started to struggle. The monkey said, Look how happy he is. Of course, the fish died and the monkey said, Oh, what a pity. If I had only come sooner I would have saved this guy."

I have only a few more to comment on and will do so through edits shortly.

DB

The Best of The Best, November 5, 2010

A Year in Science, October 11, 2010
A straightforward introduction to science and environmental events from the past year, glossing over topics which have also been covered in popular science books during the same time frame. If you are wondering what you may have missed, this is a great start, and a fine introduction to this series. I must confess, this series is my candy, I ate up the last half decade of them in a few days span.

While some of the past years' anthologies seem very dated, with so many developments within the fields in the intervening years, I reckon that this specific entry will hold up fairly well. Why? At first I was a bit skeptical of how much I felt Dyson's presence in the pages; it seemed too much for such an anthology, that these were his articles. However, looking back, it seems like these were very good selections, such as a profile on Elon Musk, who seems to be in the news more for his personal exploits than his scientific ones, and an article on the history of astronomy. Overall, it is a good starting point for those new to the series or interested in learning more about recent events in science, and for finding out what to read more of. For instance, Neil Shubin, mentioned briefly in a paragraph in one article, has an entire book devoted to what he is quoted on, so if that is what appeals, do check it out! And likewise, for other mentions. I am consistently impressed with this series because it manages to cover certain things I have read earlier in depth and find random gems in the pages of magazines or journals I would normally not read, or in some cases, think would have such engaging scientifically-minded articles.

(received ebook ARC from Netgalley)

Good addition to a wonderful series, November 17, 2010

Outstanding example of this always-excellent series, November 11, 2010

An inessential collection of essential writings, November 1, 2010

Absolutely wonderful collection! Dyson rocks..., October 28, 2010

Editorial Review

Reviews

Science for non-science people, October 13, 2010
Full disclosure: I am an ex-English major who hasn't taken a science class since high school. When I started reading this book (I got my copy when it was released in England), I was scared that I wouldn't be able to follow along. But I was SO WRONG- this book really gets beneath the pseudo-science (and flat out WRONG science claims) and explains everything in such a relaxed, simple, and intuitive way, I never had a problem. I learned so much from this, and I had considered myself pretty well informed BEFORE I read the book! This should be mandatory reading for ANYONE who is anti-vaccination, or pro-homeopathy. Brilliant stuff. (His blog is great too!)

Simply Excellent, October 12, 2010
I read this book several years ago, after ordering it from amazon.co.uk, and am very pleased that it's coming to North America. Although many of the examples used will be UK-specific, and thus perhaps unfamiliar to readers, the content remains very pertinent. Science and skepticism are sorely needed everywhere, but most especially in the field of medicine. In this book Dr. Ben Goldacre provides us with a wonderful primer on evaluating claims made in this most important of areas.

recommended for all skeptics (and even more so for the credulous), November 4, 2010
Bad Science is an excellent entry to the genre of skeptical books that are, in this country, associated with Michael Shermer, James Randi, and Paul Kurtz. It is a pleasure to read, both because Goldacre writes well, and because the books from Shermer, et al, are very similar to each other and this one is in many regards refreshingly different.

Part of this stems from its national origin -- this is a very British book. As a result, it has a lot more about the MMR-vaccine-causes-autism nonsense than would have appeared in an American book, as the media panic in the U.K. was much greater than the one here. It similarly has less on faith healing and other topics that loom larger in the American consciousness.

But the book also differs in approach. In the quintessential American members of the genre, various bits of nonsense are debunked with a combination of common sense and powerful anecdote. American writers are particularly fond of grand gestures, sneaking into the back room and discovering the wizard hiding behind the curtain. That's not Goldacre's style at all. Instead, his favorite tool is the statistical blobbogram. The main targets of his scorn are holistic healers, vendors of pharmaceuticals and vitamins, who lie and abuse statistical techniques to mislead people into buying products that don't work instead of using ones that do. He similarly rails against the journalists who enable these malefactors.

Goldacre is a physician, so he spends most of his time on medical topics, but not all.

I enjoyed and appreciated every chapter of this book, and I hope many other people read it too.

I think everyone should read this book, November 1, 2010
This was one of the faster reads I've had in a long time. The engaging writing does not in any way compromise the very important points that the author makes along the way. I highly recommend it.

A must-read for everyone!, October 20, 2010
Media today can send your head spinning with over-information. Vaccinations are bad! Homeopathy is NATURAL and therefore GOOD! In Bad Science, you can learn the truth behind all of these claims, and learn for yourself what is real and what is hype. The power should be in your own hands to choose what is good for you. Educating yourself about exactly what homeopathy is, and facts about acupuncture, and knowing what chiropractic medicine actually involves is the best way to gaining control over your making your own decisions.

A must read for everyone! Yes, it's that good., November 19, 2010
I never expected any popular technical writer to be able to top the Freakonomics books, but Dr Goldacre does a fantastic job of sucking you in and then engrossing you in what would seem to be the next dullest of subjects - medical statistics. Most of the cases and examples are of British origin but fortunately so is his wit. I am a professional in the field of health science and pay a lot of attention to the "evidence basis" of healthcare policy, but honestly I learned a lot from this book.

He starts out with a frontal assault on homeopathy but turns more catholic in his debunking, including the purported quality of randomized clinical trials, and even the systematic reviews that are the bedrock of contemporary medical practice. Of course the pharmaceutical industry comes off as the villian it is, but more amusing is Goldacre's take on how the media promotes half-truths and outright lies in order to sell itsa product as well. This has been made well known by Dr. Ioannides, whose article on the subject made history of sorts by being the most downloaded article in the past 5 years from any medical journal.

This would be an extremely fun book only for the "Freakonomics" style humor and whimsical approach to a deadly serious subject, but the content makes it an essential read for anyone who has a self-image of being a careful consumer.

An important book that should be widely read, December 1, 2010
Ben Goldacre has done an important public service by providing a science-based criticism of alternative medicine, including megadose vitamins, homeopathy, and so-called "nutritionists". He saves a few arrows for the pharmaceutical companies, and pointedly and entertainingly shows how tenuous is the relationship between claims of the alternative medicine proponents and sound science. I am recommending this book to all of my friends and colleagues.

Most curly haired guys write good books., November 18, 2010
This was a great book that can be applied to nearly everything in life, not just medicine and alternative medicine. Too much of what we hear is nonsense and it is especially irritating because reality is more interesting. I think people who like this book will also like White Coat, Black Hat: Adventures on the Dark Side of Medicine ... Read more

Editorial Review

Edited by New York Times bestselling author Jerome Groopman, The Best American Science Writing 2010 collects in one volume the most crucial, thought-provoking, and engaging science writing of the year. Distinguished by new and impressive voices as well as some of the foremost names in science writing—David Dobbs, Elizabeth Kolbert, and Larissa MacFarquhar among them—this eleventh edition features outstanding journalism from a wide variety of publications, providing a comprehensive overview of the year’s most compelling, relevant, and exciting developments in the world of science. Provocative and engaging, The Best American Science Writing 2010 reveals just how far science has brought us—and where it is headed next.

Editorial Review

A vibrant collection of essays on the cosmos from the nation's best-known astrophysicist. “One of today’s best popularizers of science.”—KirkusReviews.Loyal readers of the monthly "Universe" essays in Natural History magazine have long recognized Neil deGrasse Tyson's talent for guiding them through the mysteries of the cosmos with stunning clarity and almost childlike enthusiasm. Here, Tyson compiles his favorite essays across a myriad of cosmic topics. The title essay introduces readers to the physics of black holes by explaining the gory details of what would happen to your body if you fell into one. "Holy Wars" examines the needless friction between science and religion in the context of historical conflicts. "The Search for Life in the Universe" explores astral life from the frontiers of astrobiology. And "Hollywood Nights" assails the movie industry's feeble efforts to get its night skies right.

Known for his ability to blend content, accessibility, and humor, Tyson is a natural teacher who simplifies some of the most complex concepts in astrophysics while simultaneously sharing his infectious excitement about our universe. ... Read more

Reviews

Explores theories of the universe from the Big Bang to the Final Whimper, February 4, 2007
An astrophysicist with the American Museum of Natural History, where he serves at its world-famous Hayden Planetarium, Neil deGrasse Tyson has written a popular account of the evolution of the universe: its past, present, and future--from its beginning with a big bang to its ending with a whimper.

In Death by Black Hole and Other Cosmic Quandaries, Tyson sees the universe "not as a collection of objects, theories, and phenomena, but as a vast stage of actors driven by intricate twists of story line and plot."

Each of the book's 42 chapters first appeared, in one form or another, on the pages of Natural History magazine under the heading "Universe" and span the 11-year period of 1995 through 2005. In spite of modest editing of the essays, there remains some overlapping and repetition of information.

Tyson divides his work into seven sections: "The Nature of Knowledge," "The Knowledge of Nature," "Ways and Means of Nature," "The Meaning of Life," "When the Universe Turns Bad," "Science and Culture," and "Science and God."

He discusses, respectively, the challenges of knowing what is knowable in the universe, the challenges of discovering the contents of the cosmos, the challenges and triumphs of knowing how we got here, all the ways the cosmos wants to kill us, the ruffled interface between cosmic discovery and the public's reaction to it, and when ways of knowing collide.

Tyson introduces a diverse company of actors who perform on the universal stage: galaxies, solar systems, stars, quasars, black holes, supernovas, planets, moons, comets, asteroids and meteorites. These cosmic thespians emerge as a strange, bizarre, mind-boggling, awesome and dangerous cast of characters.

Along the way, we meet some of the big names in the history of astrophysics: Nicolaus Copernicus, whose De Revolutionibus (1543) placed the Sun instead of Earth at the center of the known universe; Galileo Galilei and Johannes Kepler, who extended the Copernican revolution; Sir Isaac Newton, whom Tyson calls "one of the greatest intellects the world has ever seen," and whose Principia (1687) described the universal laws of gravity; Albert Einstein, whose special theory of relativity (1905) and general theory of relativity (1916) postulated that space-time is warped in the presence of massive gravitation fields; Max Planck. the founding father of quantum mechanics; and Werner Heisenberg, proponent of the infamous uncertainty principle.

A recent speculation about how the universe works is string theory, which seeks to unite the apparent contradiction between how the macrocosmos works (determinism) and how the microcosmos works (indeterminism). Like many of the quandaries that baffle physicists, the jury is still out on string theory.

Tyson is deeply committed to the scientific method. He is an empiricist, pragmatist, skeptic and, one suspects, an agnostic. In "The Perimeter of Ignorance," the final section of his book, Tyson fulminates against the 17th- and 18th-century view of a "clockwork universe" and its modern version, "intelligent design," which is itself a disguised version of so-called Creation Science.

Far from being a clockwork universe, Tyson argues, the cosmos is actually a chaos. "The invisible light picked up by the new telescopes," he writes, "shows that mayhem abounds in the cosmos: monstrous gamma-ray bursts, deadly pulsars, matter-crushing gravitational fields, matter-hungry black holes that flay their bloated stellar neighbors, newborn stars igniting within pockets of collapsing gas . . .galaxies that collide and cannibalize each other, explosions of supermassive stars, chaotic stellar and planetary orbits."

One doesn't have to venture into the outer reaches of space to find such mayhem: "Our cosmic neighborhood--the inner solar system--turns out to be a shooting gallery, full of rogue asteroids and comets that collide with planets. Occasionally, they've even wiped out stupendous masses of Earth's flora and fauna. The evidence all points to the fact that we occupy not a well-mannered clockwork universe, but a destructive, violent, and hostile one."

Tyson's conclusion? "Science is a philosophy of discovery. Intelligent design is a philosophy of ignorance. . . . It doesn't belong in the science classroom." He deplores the prospect that we Americans might just sit in awe of what we don't understand, mesmerized by a pious allegiance to "the God of the gaps," while our science and technology loses ground and we watch the rest of the world boldly go where no mortal has gone before.

Tyson comes across as having an excellent grasp of the current state of astrophysics, cosmology, chemistry, and other scientific disciplines, and, except for a few dense passages, he conveys his knowledge clearly to the nonspecialist, often doing so with ingratiating humor and wit.

Educational AND entertaining. EXCELLENT BOOK., February 27, 2007
First of all I am not a scientist, but if all science teachers had the wit, confidence and attitude of Mr. Tyson, then we all (non-scientists) would have probably paid more attention in class. I could not put the book down and although I thought it dragged just a little bit in the middle (the re-hashing of the atomic make up and eventual atomic breakdown of stars), the repetetive nature of some of his information was excellent in terms of helping the layperson to retain the information.

The amount of subject matter explained in this book is pretty heavy for a non-scientist, yet Mr. Tyson is able to get the points and information across in witty and entertaining way. I did feel that I learned a lot from reading this, from him talking about the smallest of structures such as antimatter, positrons, atoms, etc. to him explaining the largest of structurs and how they work (the universe). Theories on the Big Bang are explained as is the theories and probabilities of other life in the universe. What it would be like to be sucked into a black hole is described as is what it will happen when our Sun will eventually expand, destroying Earth, then die. How about what will happen when our solar system collides with our closest neighboring solar system, the Andromeda Galaxy? It is explained. Mr. Tyson has a talent for making the end of the universe, the eventual extinction of human-kind and our own insignificance sound as entertaining as a movie drama, and he does it with enthusiasm. This book is scary if you were to sit back and ponder the very distant, and maybe not so distant future (did you know there is an asteroid as big as the Rose Bowl that in 2029 will come so close to Earth that it will pass underneath some of our satellites AND if its path travels through certain spot or "keyhole" by Earth, its orbit will fluctuate enough to send it on a collision course with Earth in 2037 - hitting somewhere in the Pacific between Hawaii and California? Shouldn't someone be working on this worse case scenario?). It was eventual that with all the information presented, he was going to touch on the science vs. religion debate. His explanation of where religion and science have crossed paths in the past and where they are clashing now is very well explained, but it is still presented in his fact rich, confident, pro-science tone.

There is too much in the book to cover in a review. But I would say that to truly enjoy it, you would have to read some of it, then go outside at night and look up at the stars. Then read more of it and go look through telescope, read more of it and look up pictures from the Hubble Telescope online. The book, to me, was an informative doorway that opened up my eyes to the universe around and our place (and insignificance) in it.

Accessible and Entertaining Cosmology, February 26, 2007
Get out your crayons. Make a Sun in the sky. If it is like every Sun you have colored since you were a kid, it is a happy yellow ball. "And I don't care what else anyone has ever told you, the Sun is white, not yellow," writes astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson in _Death by Black Hole and Other Cosmic Quandaries_ (Norton). "If the sun were yellow, like a yellow lightbulb, then white stuff such as snow would reflect this light and appear yellow - a snow condition confirmed to happen only near fire hydrants." How do we keep getting this wrong? Why do people think there is no gravity in space, or that what goes up must come down? How come total solar eclipses seem rare, but actually happen every couple of years? And especially important, how do we obtain those data to show us that these assumptions are wrong? Furthermore, what does happen when you step into a black hole, or into a hole that goes clean through the center of the Earth? What is going to happen when the Andromeda galaxy hits our own Milky Way? ("Gas clouds would slam into each other; stars would be cast hither and yon.. our planet could get flung out of the solar system... That would be bad.") And it is going to happen, but a couple of billion years before that happens, the Sun will explode and die and vaporize all the contents of the Earth. But as Tyson observes, "I'd say we have more pressing issues of survival before us."

Tyson's book consists of chapters that appeared as columns in _Natural History_ magazine. There is death and destruction all through it, and yet he writes with buoyant optimism and humor, making even the strangest findings of astrophysics accessible. We have a vast scientific and intellectual tradition, but we have fought against the ideas of one scientist after another who would give us a true picture. At the end of the chapter, Tyson reflects: "What are the lessons to be learned from this journey of the mind? That humans are emotionally fragile, perennially gullible, hopelessly ignorant masters of an insignificantly small speck in the cosmos. Have a nice day." The humor has the ring of truth, but Tyson is no pessimist. We may be slow to learn, but we do know some darned interesting stuff, and his presentation of it, touching on what we know, how we know it, how the universe and the solar system got started and are going to end, and what it all means to humans, is full of admiration for the scientists who got us this far. We are clever, but we are goony. A few years ago, Tyson got a call from a marketing executive who thought it would be a good idea to project her company's logo onto the Moon, and wanted to know how best to do this. Tyson slammed down the phone, but "... called her back and politely explained why it was a bad idea."

Tyson's final chapters have to do with science and religion: "The claims of science rely on experimental verification, while the claims of religion rely on faith. These are irreconcilable approaches to learning, which ensures an eternity of debate wherever and whenever the two camps meet." He does not expressly state his own beliefs, but says the argument is simple: "I have yet to see a successful prediction about the physical world that was inferred or extrapolated from the content of any religious document." People fail to realize that the skepticism scientists show towards religious explanations that, say, the Earth is less than 10,000 years old, that humans were supernaturally created in their current form, or that microbes had to have their propeller tails divinely attached, is the same sort of skepticism the scientists show to scientific pronouncements, too. Look what happened to the chemists who declared they had created cold fusion on their lab table: other scientists wouldn't accept the claim as true until it could be verified, and having tried to reproduce the results, could not. Case closed. The proponents of Intelligent Design, Tyson explains, are absurdly pessimistic in their philosophy "It's too complicated for any human being to figure out. So it must be the product of a higher intelligence." Maybe there is a limit to how much we can understand, he says, but what if, say, Newton had decided no human could figure out the laws of motion? "I don't want students who could make the next major breakthrough in renewable energy sources or space travel to have been taught that anything they don't understand, and that no one yet understands, is divinely constructed and therefore beyond their intellectual capacity." It is as close to polemic as Tyson gets; this hugely entertaining and instructive collection of essays stands as testament to how important it is not to close off curiosity prematurely.

Succeeds at making the complex knowable., May 31, 2007
I've read a decent number of "popular" science books, all aimed at making truly complex scientific concepts digestible for lay people. As I read Tyson's offering, I began thinking that he was covering ground that was far less complex than some books I'd read earlier. The more I thought about it, the more I realized that Tyson was actually tackling some pretty challenging subject matter and simply doing a really nice job of describing the concepts in plain English.

Tyson discusses nuclear fusion, the birth and death of stars, the likelihood of life existing elsewhere in the universe, threats to the earth's existence and much more. To keep the pace fast and fun, he makes references to scientific movie goof-ups and other pop-culture science gaffs. Tyson even thoughtfully discusses intelligent design and religion as it relates to science.

If you've never read a science book written for the layperson, this is a great place to get your feet wet and see if you want to read more in the genre. If you're an old hand at this stuff, you'll like this one but may find it less challenging than other books in the same vein. Either way, it's a fun read and you'll learn a lot too.

Gould for the Common Man?, May 17, 2008
Neil deGrasse Tyson is the current director of the hayden Planetarium and an astrophysicist with the American Museum of Natural History. His picture shows a portly African-American with a wry smile, wearing a vest with astonomical figures perhaps cut from a wizard's robe discarded by Hogwarts. Most likely half of America knows better what he looks and sounds like than I do, since he appears frequently on TV, on the Daily Show and various Fox blathergrounds. I heard him talking about comets for a few minutes on my car radio, and found him very quick, very amusing.

A comparison with Stephen Jay Gould is almost inevitable. This book, like most of Gould's, is a selection of Tyson's columns for the magazine Natural History. Tyson has a lighter touch and will be easier going for people without much background in science. He is nowhere near as encyclopedic or allusive as Gould, which will come as a relief to many. Gould wrote, increasingly so over the years, as a Harvard Don, which all the rhetorical flourishes of a man who expects his readers to be very erudite. The danger of such writing is pomposity and condescension. Since I almost became a Harvard Don myself, I have a high tolerance for pomposity, but I find Tyson's writing style delightfully relaxed.

Tyson's subject in Death by Black Hole is the astronomical zoo of gravitationally caged objects - stars, planets, comets, asteroids, and Anomalous Flying Objects - in what we still call the Universe, although the name seems less and less appropriate. Tyson back-fills as needed with tidbits of history but his central purpose is to make us acquainted with current observational astronomy. People who "already know all that" will enjoy his witty delivery, while the rest of us will learn quite a lot, quite painlessly.

One of the Identified Flying Objects Tyson describes is the asteroid Apophis, which ought to be of maximum interest for anyone under 40 years old. Tyson writes: "On Friday the 13th of April, 2029, an asteroid large enough to fill the Rose Bowl as though it were an egg cup, will fly so close to Earth that it will dip below the altitude of our communication satellites ...If the trajectory of Apophis at close approach passes within a narrow range of altitudes called the Keyhole, the precise influence of Earth's gravity on its orbit will guarantee that seven years later in 2036...the asteroid will hit earth directly, slamming in the Pacific Ocean between California and Hawaii." You knew that, didn't you, and you've already made reservations for the observation grandstand on Mt. Whitney? What a show! But Tyson continues: "The tsunami it creates will wipe out the entire west coast of North America, bury Hawaii, and devastate all the land masses of the Pacific Rim." Oops. I'd better warn my grandchildren to sell my house in SF before it's too late.
Tyson doesn't mention it, but there's an upside to Apophis -- no need to worry about global warming after all.

In fact, Tyson is not all levity about Apophis, or about the inevitable fate of civilization. Later in the book, he discusses what "we" should be doing about our self-preservation in a universe that is far from anthropically perfect for human life, or any kind of life at all. Read it and quake - from laughter as well as fear.

Entertaining and educational at the same time, March 8, 2007
Death by Black Hole by Neil Tyson is among the best astronomy related books to appear for some time. In the best traditions of Carl Sagan, another popularizer of things cosmolgical, Tyson does a masterful job at explaining often drab and uninteresting topics in a most excellent manner. Death by Black Hole reminds me of book written by Isaac Asimov nearly thirty years ago, A Choice of Catastrophies. Death has the benefit, however, of thirty years of new information about the cosmos.

Consisting of 42 articles that originally appeared in Natural History, Death by Black Hole covers a huge range of topics; everthing from basic astronomy subjects to sophisticated physics topics. The most interesting chapters, in my opinion only are Chapt 7, Planet Parade; Chapt. 11, Antimatter Matters; Chapt 17, Colors of the Cosmos, Chapt 23, Goldilocks and the Three Planets; Chapt 30, Ends of the World; and Chapt 41, Holy Wars. Actually, there isn't a bad read in any of the 42 chapters, but these just seem to stand out.

Carl Sagan would have enjoyed Death by Black Holes....maybe he has read it where ever he is at.

An excellent book to add to your library.

An enthralling tour of the cosmos!, April 21, 2007
This is a highly entertaining book that covers a wide variety of subjects about the universe and explains in rather easy to understand terms many mysteries of the cosmos. Dr. Tyson has a gift in making complex subjects very accessible and captivating. He has recently become the new president of The Planetary Society (which was co-founded by Carl Sagan in 1980 and which I quickly joined after meeting Carl while working at JPL during that time). In this book, Dr. Tyson includes a selection of his essays from his work at the American Museum of Natural History, some of which were also used in his video presentation, "My Favorite Universe", available from The Teaching Company. As an astrophysicist, he presents many thought provoking realms of science in this book with an insight that few others could do.

As he points out, sometimes science and especially cosmology and astrophysics don't seem to make sense to us but this is somewhat due to our own rather limited senses. We base `making sense' on what we get as inputs from our five senses. But we see only a tiny portion of the electromagnetic spectrum (the visible light) and hear only a limit audio range, smell only a fraction of what a dog can smell, etc. He describes what the world would be like to us if we could `see' in radio waves or X-rays or gamma rays or have ultrasonic hearing, or sense magnet fields, etc. What would `make sense' to us then? Only in recent times has the entire electromagnetic spectrum been opened to mankind via new types of telescopes and the discoveries from these are pouring in at an astounding rate. We even have neutrino telescopes (detectors) that can record the rare interactions of these tiny particles (billions of which pass through our bodies every second without effect). One of the great mysteries of the Sun (and other stars) has been answered by these underground `telescopes'.

There is something for everyone in this book, from the amazing amount of astronomy you can do with nothing but a stick to the origin of the elements inside our very bodies to the ultimate fate of the universe. Of course in a book of this type, it would be impossible to overlook the contributions of so many great scientists and thinkers of the past who have paved the way to our present understanding. Dr. Tyson has introduced us once again to many of these people who should never be forgotten. Hopefully some young readers of this book will one day join these ranks as people who ask questions and seek out answers with open minds and provide the future generations with an even better foundation on which to build our understanding of the universe!

Easy to read primer on astrophysics, March 9, 2007
This book is a collection of essays - perfect for a series of short reads.

Lively, lightweight overview of astronomy and cosmology, May 6, 2007
Our great communicators of science have been dying too young: both Carl Sagan and Stephen Jay Gould were barely into the sixties when they left us. The question then becomes, who is to replace them? One of the first names to come up in such discussions is often that of Neil deGrasse Tyson, director of the Hayden Planetarium at the American Museum of Natural History.

Like Gould, Tyson was asked to produce a monthly column for Natural History, the magazine published by the museum. Here is collected many of those pieces. Focusing of course on astronomy, they are a lightweight, readable overview of the field and the latest findings therein. In fact, for the most part it's a little too lightweight for me, but then I'm finishing up a master's degree in astronomy, so I'm not exactly the typical reader. Even then, there are plenty of good essays in here, particularly when he takes on astronomical blunders in the movies (after spending tens of millions to reproduce the ship in excruciating detail, why couldn't Titanic at least bother to get the stars right?) or common misconceptions (no, the days don't get shorter during the winter, and the Sun hardly ever rises in the East, strictly speaking), or, more morbidly, all the ways that some astronomical object or event could destroy all human life, which takes up several essay, including the one that gives the book its title.

His style is wonderfully clear, with entertaining, down-to-earth asides at appropriate moments, and frequently relating cosmological concepts to more prosaic ones. So, while I wouldn't recommend the book to the astronomically erudite, anyone with more than a passing interest should find it interesting and enjoyable.

A guy I'd enjoy having a beer with, March 19, 2007
I am an amateur astronomer and have been one for almost 50 years. My library shelves are filled with books on astronomy and cosmology, some of them dating back to the ancient Greeks. When I read some books, the writer gives me an impression of a bored scientist given a dull lecture that is beyond my comprehension and a waste of my time. He just drones on about abstract formulas as my tortured mind wanders.

This is most certainly NOT the case with Neil deGrasse Tyson's book "Death by Black Hole: And Other Cosmic Quandaries". Dr. Tyson's approach is that of an old friend who sits down with you in a quiet pub and opens the universe to your eyes. His well balanced and light hearted approach is a welcome experience. For example, as he describes the process of a star starting to feel its age, he states:

"Meanwhile, back inside the star, fusion proceeds apace. Eventually the hot zone runs out of helium, leaving behind a ball of carbon surrounded by a shell of helium that is itself surrounded by the rest of the star. Now the core collapses again."

If you want to find out what happens when the core collapses again, as he describes in exciting detail the steps leading up to a supernova, you'll need to buy his book. Right now, I'm a little over half way through his book, and I can't wait to see where he takes me next!

Yes, he is someone I would really love to be able to sit down with, have a beer or two, and find out where our universe is going. ... Read more

Editorial Review

From avalanches to glaciers, from seals to snowflakes, and from Shackleton's expedition to "The Year Without Summer," Bill Streever journeys through history, myth, geography, and ecology in a year-long search for cold--real, icy, 40-below cold. In July he finds it while taking a dip in a 35-degree Arctic swimming hole; in September while excavating our planet's ancient and not so ancient ice ages; and in October while exploring hibernation habits in animals, from humans to wood frogs to bears.

A scientist whose passion for cold runs red hot, Streever is a wondrous guide: he conjures woolly mammoth carcasses and the ice-age Clovis tribe from melting glaciers, and he evokes blizzards so wild readers may freeze--limb by vicarious limb. ... Read more

Reviews

Shades of Farley Mowat!, August 9, 2009
Having spent a few short weeks (way, way too short an amount of time!) in the Arctic, reading this book makes me ache to return. I missed so much - I was so clueless! Reading "Cold - Adventures in the World's Frozen Places" was a very unexpected delight! I am not usually a reader of non-fiction, but this book was so interesting and well writen. The language is rich and well developed, the stories are great, the science is fascinating and most importantly, you can easily tell how much the author loves everything cold, but especially Alaska and the far north.

new generation of eco-criticism, August 5, 2009
This is a beautiful, evocative book about not just the science or experience of cold but the poetics of the chill. Mr. Streever is an accomplished scientist and nature writer, and this book goes beyond his previous publications to embrace the science and the spirit of the outdoors. Throughout the book, he blends technical observation with historical reference, literary allusion, and personal memoir. Writing of this kind moves beyond the generation of John McPhee -- with its precise detachment and patrician elegance -- and it moves beyond, too, the exhortations of Bill McKibben. IF there is a future for eco-criticism, it may lie precisely in the fractured narrative of Streever's Alaska. In many ways, the arc of the book captures what must be the Alaskan experience: a collection of memories and materials, brought in from "outside," and reassembled into public spaces and private imaginations. It may well be that the the book's controlling structure, then, mirrors the midnight-sun pastiche that is this state, and it's good to know that, whatever the politics may be on that peninsula, there is a profound sensitivity to life and writing among people such as Mr. Streever.

Warmth for Cold, August 6, 2009
With so much heat in our future -- global warming, Dante's Inferno, the aging Sun enlarging to swallow the Earth -- why should cold be such a fascinating topic? In long, long time, a leading theory of the end of the universe called "heat death" says that absolute cold is the fate of us all -- or at least of our atomic remains. Cold, in other words, is the natural order of things.

Streever does a great job of describing the effects of this inevitability in this intellectually compelling yet entertaining book. We read that the Earth was itself once a frozen planet "only" 700m years back (the Earth is 4.5b years old). We see how life is impacted by and adjusts itself to the effects of cold. We see how cold ends life when these adjustments fail. And sometimes, as is the case with mammoths, cold preserves specimens for millennia to teach us about life in the distant past.

The scientist/author is an Alaskan and the book is accordingly heavy with Alaska references, but there is about an equal portion of references from the rest of the planet. He writes stylishly in something of a journal format.

It's a great read.

A Place You'll Never Be, August 31, 2009
Bill Streever's "Cold: Adventures in the World's Coldest Places," is at once a splendid travel narrative and a sort of "Cryogenics For Dummies." Streever has that unique ability to convey complex scientific principles and theories in an accessible and readable manner. More than this, though, he delievers highly evocative descriptions of landscapes and nature, or cities and citizens, and he includes plenty of subtle wit and dry humor.

Sentences such as "The red fox, the tiger, the wolf, the wolverine, and the raven all cross biome boundaries as if they did not exist, as if they have never read an ecology textbook or studied a biome map," can be, for the right kind of reader, laugh-out-loud funny.

Or try this for understated whimsy: "On the mountainsides above Anchorage, chinook winds can reach hurricane strength. The loss of roofs from hillside houses is not unknown, giving wealthy homeowners exceptional but unexpected views of crisp winter skies."

Much of the last quarter of the book is devoted to global warming. Though he makes his position clear, Streever is not an ideologue, content to discuss the facts, contemplate the consequences, and ultimately, to acknowledge that even in the worst case scenario, we occupy a minuscule slice in the grand sweep of time.

Take a Vicarious Winter-Swimming Plunge: Read "Cold", August 9, 2009
In "Cold" Streever, a modern-day wonderer and wanderer of the North, documents, with Nordic poeticism of Knut Hamsun, the challenge and the opportunity of cold. The book is replete with intriguing "cold" trivia that prompt a range of unexpected reading associations (ranging from cosmic to existential). Perhaps, the only cold-factoid Streever overlooked is the one about naked Tibetan monks drying up icy-wet sheets in the middle of winter by having somehow figured out how to burn off the "brown" fat on demand. As a cold-shower "fanatic" and an occasional winter-swimmer myself, I enjoyed reading "Cold" in the first week of August as a kind of vicarious winter-swimming dip. Take a plunge: read "Cold."
Pavel Somov, Ph.D.

[...]

If You Learn Absolutely Zero From This Book Then Your Brain Must Be Frostbitten, September 6, 2009
This book is a refreshing blast of cold air.For someone who is familiar with much of both Arctic and Antarctic issues, I was impressed with obtaining more information on both supra and subnivean topics. Weather,climate,animal migration and winter habits,permafrost and various other sundry topics polar and non- polar are touched upon.Global warming was also addressed in a non threatening circuitous way as well as exploration past and present with some references to the giants of polar history and their work within the deep, cold, interiors.Particularly interesting was the discussion of the conquest of cold which is the title of another wonderful book by the same name written by Tom Shachtman back in 1999 which I read and is referred to by Mr.Streever several times and should be read after this one if your interest grows deeper.Cold is well written by a scientist over the course of a years time with globe trotting observations but always returning to his home state of Alaska in what appears to be a sort of grounding for him.The book itself imparts lots of facts and factoids that can only help not hinder one who studies the frigidly wonderful topic of cold.For those in the know this ground may have already been covered by you and some may find it lacking or just National Geographicalish in its approach. But sometimes old dogs can learn new tricks and books like this can generate new areas of inquiry and reference as it did for me. It helps keep it fresh to read new things even at the risk of going over old material.It is recommended as a good primer for the novice to further ones' appreciation of the ice and its expansive history as well as the problems it can cause and may give you a better admiration of your refrigerator or air conditioner for without those people who did the work, those individuals in history who said, "Gee whiz, its hot in here, my food is rotting and I'm sweating like a pig,what can I do about that"? Now you can erect an alter to the men who fixed that for you right in your own freezer.Be that as it may, I found it very enjoyable and breezed through it quite fast.It is written as if you were talking to a real lonely, arctic scientist who doesn't get out much and is both extremely happy and excited to find a willing, captive, listener as topics tend to pop up and drift into another rather fast but you'll be able to follow his bent.So button up with confidence with some useful information on insulating fabrics,ours and the Eskimo's.The mechanisms of frostbite or how the Bose-Einstein condensate, atoms that form at absolute zero,about 460 degrees F. may someday change the world. Read and learn about this facinating corner of science and warm up to the concept of cold.A cup of hot cocoa may be in order. Enjoy the summer while you can, an ice age may be coming soon and just think, if it does, you'll be ready for it.

Fascinating anecdotes, beautifully told, October 30, 2009
"Cold" by Bill Streever is a beautifully-written book, one of the best I have read in this genre.

Streever goes on a year-long quest for cold, with a Chapter devoted to each month. In each month he discusses particular "cold events" that occurred in the month, such as the severe US blizzard of January 1888 - the School Children's Blizzard.

These examples are interspersed with personal details of his own life and studies of cold as the year unfolds. In Streever's book this works well, and some of his descriptive passages are very evocative. This is a pleasant change from some other books in the genre that are simply vehicles for narcissistic display by the author. In "Cold" the subject enjoys the limelight, not the author elbowing the actors out of the way.

Some of Streever's anecdotes are truly surprising: lumps of ice falling out of the sky the size of a man in the 19th century, snowflakes 15 inches across. He explains how the Year Without a Summer (1815) contributed to the invention of the bicycle.

He gives an excellent account of hypothermia, and why some of its victims die soon after being rescued.

Streever lives in Alaska, and life there is very different to life in more temperate places. Houses sink as permafrost melts. People burn down their homes trying to un-freeze frozen pipes with blowtorches. Frost heave pushes posts out of the ground.

Most living tissue cannot survive being frozen. Streever gives some graphic accounts of how freezing affects cells. So I am not too optimistic for the future of James Bedford, who has been stored in liquid nitrogen since 1967, awaiting a cure for cancer.

Remarkably, a surprising number of living creatures can survive freezing. There is a caterpillar in Alaska that routinely "hibernates" over winter by freezing solid, and thawing out in spring to go about its business. Some frogs freeze. The most striking example of cold tolerance is the African desert fly that can even survive liquid helium at -450 degrees F.

When skiing I get ravenously hungry. Streever explains why this is so. Apart from the calories needed to sustain vigorous exercise, we also need a remarkable amount of energy simply to counteract the effects of cold. Early Polar explorers did not appreciate this aspect of nutrition sufficiently when planning food supplies for their expeditions and many died because they simply did not have enough food.

One could go on listing the fascinating aspects of cold discussed in the book. Naturally, not everything can be included. But I would have liked some mention of cold-induced brittle fracture of Liberty ships in World War 2. Twelve Liberty ships broke in half without warning because the grade of steel used suffered from embrittlement. Ships in the North Atlantic were exposed to temperatures that could fall below a critical point and thus the hull could fracture relatively easily.

Strange worlds of cold, October 19, 2009
Thoroughly fascinating read. Streever exposes a most peculiar world that few of us will experience. If there's any criticism I can levy toward the book it's that I wanted more. When you're sorry you've reached the end, that's a good sign to me. I recommend this highly to anyone with an interest in the natural world.

Cold is Cool, September 3, 2009
You can bet that Bill Streever likes cold better than you do. After all, standing in his swimming shorts in wind, rain, and a chill of 51 degrees, he plunges into the 35 degree water of Prudhoe Bay, three hundred miles above the Arctic Circle, for five minutes. You won't be surprised that he finds it cold, bitingly cold, but advises us that it's not really so cold, in the scheme of things - it is much warmer than a block of dry ice, which is warmer than liquid nitrogen, which is warmer than the surface of Pluto. After five minutes in the water, shivering, he emerges, but it is two hours before he feels warm again. His dip is just the starting immersion into cold in _Cold: Adventures in the World's Frozen Places_ (Little, Brown). Streever is a biologist who works on various surveys and committees, many having to do with climate and climate change. "Cold is cool," he says, and his book emphasizes how interesting low temperatures are, with the way animals have evolved to handle them and the way humans have pioneered into polar regions. There is, however, a good deal of grim death here, from frozen mammoths to explorers to cryogenically frozen corpses. Streever can write poetically, and always has a good humor. His book is full of science, but it is casually written in twelve chapters, each accounting for a month in which he tells us of his travels and interests in the cold regions. It is discursive, with one topic or anecdote popping up in different aspects in different chapters, a friendly and informative science book.

For instance, Streever frequently returns to James Bedford, who died of cancer in 1967, but who is lying around at 367 degrees below zero, waiting for a cancer cure. Ice crystals have damaged the cells too much for Bedford's life to return, but maybe he just viewed that as a problem that future scientists will solve, along with curing his cancer. He might have taken heart from the members of the animal kingdom who so intrigue Streever. For instance, frogs freeze. Not all frogs, just those specially adapted to do so. "To be clear, these are not frogs that are cold, but frogs that are literally frozen. Pick them up, and they are hard as ice." They have ice between their cells and in body cavities, but the cells themselves are so full of glucose as an antifreeze that the ice does not shred them. They are, Streever says, "frogsicles". Streever has been absorbed by the journals kept by the great polar explorers. "When one reads past the stoicism and heroics, the history of polar exploration becomes one long accident report mixed with one long obituary." If the extremes of earthly cold are not enough, Streever introduces us to some of the scientists who are pushing the thermometer as close to the bottom as it can ever go. Cold is the absence of heat, the absence of molecular motion, and there might not seem to be any logical reason that the molecules and their constituent atoms should all stand still at absolute zero. This temperature, which is 460 degrees below zero Fahrenheit, seems to be unattainable; a couple of thousand atoms have been cooled to within fifty-billionths of a degree of this goal, but getting all the way there has so far proved impossible.

Streever manages a review of our understanding of the deep history of climate. 700 million years ago, there was a mean temperature of minus sixty degrees, according to the "Snowball Earth" idea, which Streever presents as science strongly colored by the forceful personality of the man who first proposed it. He takes us through the ice ages, and the effects of ancient glaciation on the geology of different parts of the world. He invokes the "Little Ice Age", which started in the fourteenth century and continued to the mid-nineteenth. It included the enormous eruption of the Indonesian Tambora volcano in 1815, which among other things, chilled the weather so that Lord Byron's guests had to hole up in his retreat near Geneva in 1816, telling ghost stories. This included Mary Shelley, who came up with _Frankenstein_; the movies don't show that much of the novel involves an Arctic setting complete with an explorer and his boat. Of course Streever covers global warming, late into his year-long exploration of cold regions, explaining the positions of the "climate change kooks" and the "naysayers", but of course he sides on the compelling data that the warming is real. He notes, however, that the warming is not even; changes in ocean currents may actually cool Europe and even the Antarctic interior. "There will still be opportunities to wear a double layer of caribou skin," he reflects, and you can count on Streever to take them.

Great read, August 20, 2009
2 mitten-enclosed thumbs up on this book. If you are looking for a sublime description of sublimation...you have found it. I have never been north of the Artic circle but after reading this first rate book, I've put it on the *list*. Even though it is the height of summer in the northern hemisphere, there is never a better time to curl up with this book. ... Read more

Editorial Review

Boasting almost one hundred articles and book excerpts, The Oxford Book of Modern Science Writing is a breathtaking celebration of the finest writing by scientists--the best such collection in print--packed with scintillating essays on everything from "The Discovery of Lucy" to "The Terror and Vastness of the Universe."

Edited by best-selling author and renowned scientist Richard Dawkins, this sterling collection brings together exhilarating pieces by a who's who of scientists and science writers, including Stephen Pinker, Stephen Jay Gould, Martin Gardner, Albert Einstein, Julian Huxley, and many dozens more. Readers will find excerpts from bestsellers such as Douglas R. Hofstadter's Godel, Escher, Bach, Francis Crick's Life Itself, Loren Eiseley's The Immense Journey, Daniel Dennett's Darwin's Dangerous Idea, and Rachel Carson's The Sea Around Us. There are classic essays ranging from J.B.S. Haldane's "On Being the Right Size" and Garrett Hardin's "The Tragedy of the Commons" to Alan Turing's "Computing Machinery and Intelligence" and Albert Einstein's famed New York Times article on "Relativity." And readers will also discover lesser-known but engaging pieces such as Lewis Thomas's "Seven Wonders of Science," J. Robert Oppenheimer on "War and Physicists," and Freeman Dyson's memoir of studying under Hans Bethe.

A must-read volume for all science buffs, The Oxford Book of Modern Science Writing is a rich and vibrant anthology that captures the poetry and excitement of scientific thought and discovery. ... Read more

Editorial Review

From the acclaimed author of The Pencil and To Engineer Is Human, The Essential Engineer is an eye-opening exploration of the ways in which science and engineering must work together to address our world’s most pressing issues, from dealing with climate change and the prevention of natural disasters to the development of efficient automobiles and the search for renewable energy sources. While the scientist may identify problems, it falls to the engineer to solve them. It is the inherent practicality of engineering, which takes into account structural, economic, environmental, and other factors that science often does not consider, that makes engineering vital to answering our most urgent concerns.

Henry Petroski takes us inside the research, development, and debates surrounding the most critical challenges of our time, exploring the feasibility of biofuels, the progress of battery-operated cars, and the question of nuclear power. He gives us an in-depth investigation of the various options for renewable energy—among them solar, wind, tidal, and ethanol—explaining the benefits and risks of each. Will windmills soon populate our landscape the way they did in previous centuries? Will synthetic trees, said to be more efficient at absorbing harmful carbon dioxide than real trees, soon dot our prairies? Will we construct a “sunshade” in outer space to protect ourselves from dangerous rays? In many cases, the technology already exists. What’s needed is not so much invention as engineering.

Just as the great achievements of centuries past—the steamship, the airplane, the moon landing—once seemed beyond reach, the solutions to the twenty-first century’s problems await only a similar coordination of science and engineering. Eloquently reasoned and written, The Essential Engineer identifies and illuminates these problems—and, above all, sets out a course for putting ideas into action. ... Read more

Editorial Review

"What happens when we die? Does the light just go out and that's that—the million-year nap? Or will some part of my personality, my me-ness persist? . . . What will I do all day? Is there a place to plug in my laptop?" In an attempt to find out, Mary Roach brings her tireless curiosity to bear on an array of soul-searchers: scientists, schemers, engineers, mediums, all trying to prove (or disprove) that life goes on after we die. ... Read more

Reviews

Enjoyable although not quite as sharp as "STIFF", February 11, 2006
People frequently confuse a breezy style, humor and ability to entertain with being superficial. While Mary Roach's latest book isn't quite as compelling as "Stiff" it's an enjoyable journey one step beyond. When Roach is serious (which pops up between very funny quips)she asks some important questions about the afterlife, our perception of it, ghosts and reincarnation. Perhaps it's the subtitle that disappoints people but having read "Stiff" I knew what to expect. If you come to this book ignoring the subtitle (this skeptical humorist tackles the afterlife and science although more about that later with a sense of humor but doesn't quantify the afterlife with science herself).

Roach asks some penetrating questions with humor. For example, she discusses an author that discusses reincarnation, birthmarks and how a pregnant woman can see the corpse of someone. The soul of the slain man turns up in her child. Also, she discusses a pretty creative idea--emotional imprinting from an event that can leave birthmarks on the skin of the unborn creating a duplicate of a birthmark from the person whose soul has flown into the unborn child. She goes on a journey to investigate a family that claims their child has memories from a previous life and while going as an unbiased observer using humor and logic to deflate some of these unusual claims.

Yet she's always hopeful. She relates the story of a computer that is used for near death experiences. She discusses Professor Bruce Greyson's experiment in near death experiences using a computer with images that can only be seen if you were hovering below the ceiling. Patients that have had defibrillators put in have their hearts stopped to see if their defibrillators are working (they should restart the patient's heart). Many people claim to have seen the attempt to revive them floating above their body. If that's the case they should be able to see the computer screen and tell Greyson what images are on it. She also takes a look at cases involving ghosts and other related areas.

Roach focuses on the scientific approaches taken by various people to try and verify the afterlife's existence. This isn't a "science vs. faith" argument. Instead, this is an attempt to see if the scientific approach works or not in these various experiments. Roach asks some practical and hard questions about these various experiments, theories and researchers. The subject is more elusive here than in "Stiff" for obvious reasons. This isn't a book about faith. Roach is trying to find some solid basis for faith in the afterlife and that is going to continue to be challenging.

Roach discusses in her afterword that she starts all of her books in complete ignorence of the subject. Does that provide her with a sense of the impartial attitude that journalists need to write material like this? I'm not sure but it does allow errors, holes and mistakes to occur. It also means that she really doesn't have a whole lot to prove. Regardless of whether "Spook" is as balanced and informed as it should be Roach asks some provocative questions and tries to find answers. You may not be enlightened but you will be entertained and the questions that Roach asks are always interesting. While the answers don't always hold up to scrutiny Roach's journey to discovery is always entertaining.

Big Subject, Nice Attempt, Not Worth It, January 11, 2006
I can see where Ms. Roach probably found herself a bit cornered while exploring the subject of life after death. First, she doesn't want to turn this book into a sprawling tome that explores the meaning of human existence. She also doesn't want to go down the long road of exploring every spiritual quest ever taken on by humanity. Then there are considerations regarding strongly held religious feelings; you don't want to step on the wrong toes. So, I think Ms. Roach took the right approach to the book in exploring a few areas of possible interest, looking at them as objectively as possible and seeing if anything raises an eyebrow.

So, the shortcomings of "Spook: Science Tackles the Afterlife" may not be so much the fault of the author. If you've ever watched a Bigfoot documentary, you know that you're going to be disappointed if you expect some hunter to emerge from the woods with an eight foot tall ape-man on a leash. Also, you know that the blurry footage is a guy in a gorilla suit, no matter how much you'd like to believe otherwise. These documentaries always jazz up the footage with a little editing and some scary music. That's because simply showing how unrealistic it is to believe in Bigfoot after all this time doesn't make for entertaining viewing. They're taking advantage of us because we want to be taken advantage of, just a little.

Mary Roach respects us more than that and gives us what she can. Unfortunately, it doesn't make for very entertaining reading. The one thing that was really missing for me was that feeling of "Aha!". I understood that Ms. Roach couldn't take on everything regarding the subject but I wished it had been a little wider in scope. I would've liked a little more philosophical exploration and perhaps a bit of sociological and psychological examination regarding our views on death. I'm not suggesting Roach should have done an Elizabeth Kubler Ross examination on the process of dying or re-written "Being and Nothingness", but something to chew on in those areas wouldn't have been bad.

I think there might have been a little more to touch on regarding the subject other than debunking soul weighers and psychic mediums. For instance, the culturally independent archetypes that we all share, or the discoveries in physics, mathematics, biology and philosophy that entice us to believe that there may be a God or at least a design. Then again, this book isn't called "Science tackles God", its called "Science tackles the Afterlife", but the discussion of one seems to so inevitably tie into the other, which once again leads to the complications I mentioned above.

I can't let the author completely off the hook, though. "Spook" pales in comparison to Carl Sagan's "The Demon Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark", a book that deals with similar subject matter, and more, in a more thought provoking manner. I also have a new rule regarding review snippets claiming a book to be "Hillarious!"; they are never "Hillarious!". I think "Hillarious!" is book-critic speak for "the author makes occasional off-the-cuff comments." Then again, Roach didn't need to re-write "The Demon Haunted World" and I don't get the impression that she would claim herself to be "hillarious!" Perhaps my greatest criticism of Roach's approach is that she sacrifices some of the exploration previously mentioned for long, detailed accountings of her research. I think she could have convinced the reader that she thoroughly explored the subject without giving us so much detail. She may have mistaken our enthusiasm for her own when it came to the minutiae of her subject. The few inset diagrams and photos never seem to get to the heart of what we want drawn out. Maybe she could have even stepped on a toe or two. Also, I don't know that science tackles the afterlife so much in "Spook" as does a healthy skepiticism. This is another trap; you really can't "prove" a negative.

"Tackling the afterlife" may look like a wellspring to a writer looking for a subject, but it turns into a blind alley. I can't say that its entirely the author's fault, and I wouldn't dismiss other work from Mary Roach, but "Spook" never really finds its footing. I don't think that anyone expects to find the truth of our human destiny in this book, but they won't find much else, either. Inviting as this book may seem, both skeptics and those looking for something more than life has to offer will be disappointed.

Tasty froth on some weak beer, January 3, 2006
If you're tuned in to her boisterous, quirky sense of humor, you'll find Mary Roach's book will take you on a sprightly voyage around the earthly borders of the afterlife. Don't expect any serious examination of whether there is or can be any real evidence of something beyond those borders, and you'll enjoy the excursion.

Building on the success of _Stiff_, her well-received survey on the world of corpses, our author advanced to the obvious next stage. She set out to write a book about secular investigations into the hereafter, beginning from a state of utter ignorance and friendly skepticism. She lets us look over her shoulder as she pokes around rather randomly into reincarnation research in India, the vaginal and gastric origins of ectoplasm, the accuracy of industrial scales used to weigh the soul, near death experiences, tape recordings of the long-dead in Donner Pass, and testimony from a ghost once allowed into evidence by a North Carolina court. She has a great deal of fun, much of it gossipy, some of it delightedly gross. The list of eminent men and women who have tried to cage and measure spirits is long. (I had no idea that Alexander Graham Bell's Mr. Watson was a devotee of spirit voices plucked from the ether.)

Ms Roach is game for pretty much anything, enrolling for example in a school for mediums. Skepticism wins almost every round, though never too decisively, which might spoil the party. The most interesting research is into possible correlations between hauntings and (1) infrasound or (2) EMF, each of which can induce a sense of uncanniness in a certain percentage of the population.

In sum, you will learn nothing substantial from the book, but it's not intended to resolve any serious questions. It's an entertaining, anecdote packed ramble through some of the fringe science community's haunted attics, under the aegis of a tour guide whose chatty, brassy style will turn off some tourists and enchant many others.

Not as good as Stiff, October 17, 2005
For me, this book was okay. The source of my disatisfaction is what caused one reviewer here to give the book 5 stars. The writing was beautiful, but never said much. I almost wonder if Roach was afraid to go any deeper than a superficial analysis, like she was holding back or holding out.

The information introduced is googleable and, in that sense, the book really doesn't add to the topic. It's a basic primer, that leaves you wanting more.

I also would have liked pictures. At one point, I fanned through the book hoping there would be pictures to go with the prose. There weren't and I really feel this book would've benefited from some visual aids.

The book is okay. The writing is beautiful, Roach has a gift for prose, but in this case, not for the subject.

Another One Hit Out of the Park, October 19, 2005
Whatever the topic or format, Ms. Roach brings to her work a wonderfully wry sense of irony. This book is no exception; it will keep you laughing and leave you wondering how we humans survive our own bizarre preoccupations and ambitions. Ms. Roach also has a unique gift of compassion and empathy, seasoned with rigorous skepticism, and is apparently completely without pretense. She gets quickly to the heart of any matter without ever losing heart or rubbing the noses of fools in their own folly.

This book is similar in format to her first book, Stiff; it is comprised of a series of chapters in which Ms. Roach looks over someone's shoulder as that person goes about business. In Stiff, we learned of the many ways cadavers are used; in Spook, we learn of attempts to validate the existence and nature of the soul, or some entity that endures beyond a single body's mortal life. While the subjects in Stiff were mostly to be admired for pursuing valuable science no matter how revolting, the subjects in this book are often far afield anything most readers would call science or, in some cases, reality. To appreciate the work of the denizens of Spook, one must value the subjects for their hearts and aspirations instead of appreciating their scientific contributions.

In Stiff, each chapter brought us to a new and different question of scientific process and ethics. In every new setting, a remarkable wealth of collateral information, fascinating asides, and thoughtful consideration illuminated the purpose and value of some individual's unique and arcane pursuit. Spook is similarly packed with information, all of it delightful and surprising. Due to the nature of the topic, the author's research took her to a far broader set of disciplines than just science and ethics. This is truly a work of cultural history and psychology as well as a study of how people use and abuse scientific methods.

Whether your background and affinities lean towards or away from science, this book will entertain and inform you. It is a delightful consideration of, and example of, the human capacity to explore, connect, hope, dream and laugh.

Anything But Impartial, June 4, 2006
I had expected this book to present an unbiased review of scientific efforts to establish proof of the existence of the soul. However, this book is highly biased in its presentation. Possible non-supernatural explanations get a great deal of latitude, whereas she finds excuses to dismiss any evidence that suggests that the soul does exist.

As an example of a non-supernatural explanation, Roach reports on the research of Vic Tandy, who hypothesizes that reports of ghosts are due to people's reactions to very low-frequency sound waves - infrasound. The one haunted site that Roach reports the results from, a cellar under the Coventry Tourist Information Center, does not have any infrasonic readings. There are only infrasound readings in the hallway outside the cellar. Now, if this were the reverse situation (proof of the existence of the soul), Roach would call the experiment a failure and move on. Not here. Instead, she reports Tandy's explanation that people aren't inclined to report ghosts in a well-lit hallway and that they prefer the idea of ghosts being in 14th century cellars. That is just hand-waving, not a scientific explanation either for or against the hypothesis. She also goes on at length comparing how only small numbers of people sense either the ghost or the infrasound (this does not establish a causal equivalence, though that seems to be her implication).

On the other hand, when it came to mediums, Roach was very restrictive in what she would consider sufficiently "correct". In a reading with Allison Dubois (the real life medium that the television show Medium is based on), Roach attempts to connect with her deceased mother. Near the end of the session, Dubois says, "I'm showing a metal hourglass, that you turn over. Does your brother have one?" Indeed, Roach's brother collects hourglasses. However, although Roach admits being impressed by the accuracy of the statement, Roach has all sorts of issues with Dubois' references to the letter 'K' (Roach's middle name is Catherine with a 'C') and her mother's reference to "the man that still has the ring on his finger for her." Her dad never wore a wedding ring. It never seems to occur to Roach that some things might be symbolic rather than literal. And even with the hourglass (which is very specific and certainly cannot be faulted as being a general statement that could be attributed to virtually anyone), Roach complains that it seems an odd image for her mother to send to her. Why not send her birth date or address?

Another annoying example was the way Roach dismissed a study on out-of-body projection that had had positive results (144 hits and 83 misses - much better than random chance). The researcher (Osis) and the man doing the projection (Tanous) had both died since the study came out, so she couldn't interview them. Roach summarizes the whole thing by saying, "So we are left to conclude that either Tanous was some sort of bizarre on-call living ghost, or Osis was a deluded or sloppy researcher." Maybe Roach was just trying to be humorous (as she does with flip comments throughout the book - and many of them ARE really funny), but in this case it just struck me as a mean put-down for either possible interpretation.

I think that the humorous aspect of the book played a huge role in the examples that Roach chose to include. After all, talking about attempts to weigh the soul allowed her to include all manner of bizarre anecdotal material, which provided rich sources for flip remarks. The same with the chapters on ectoplasm and going to a school on mediumship. Perhaps because this was the first book I'd read by Mary Roach, I had certain expectations for a serious exploration of the material that were not met. I read the book through to the end (though at times I debated just chucking it) because most of the cases were interesting on some level. So, if you want a whimsical, humorous, pseudo-scientific discussion of research efforts into the afterlife, you may enjoy reading this book.

Grow up, Mary, April 22, 2008
Let me begin by saying that Mary Roach is an excellent researcher and a deft writer. That's the good news. The bad news is that she is immature and there is way too much Mary in this book. Reading this book is like spending an afternoon with a precocious 12 year old boy. At first she is somewhat amusing, but quickly becomes ill-mannered, whiny, and rude. By the end of the afternoon, you are quite eager to return the boorish, annoying little brat to her parents. She has a mean streak, and when I say mean I'm talking Ann Coulter-mean. She makes fun of people's names, looks, dress, and how they talk. (As a researcher, this shows terribly bad form--you do not insult those who have been kind enough to help you write the book). She also an unsettling and frequent habit of including something gross every chance she gets. I lost count of the number of times she digressed into some tangent involving bodily functions. Then she has the nerve to write something like, "It's always underpants with these guys." No, Mary, it's always underpants with YOU. The title of the book is meant to mislead, by the way (I'm sure Mary snickered when the publisher informed her about the chosen subtitle as she knew it would pull in the "suckers.") The title should actually be "A Skeptic's Cynical Guide to Wackos who Believe in the Afterlife." Mary should not be allowed out of her room until she becomes a grown-up.

Thoroughly Entertaining, November 15, 2005
My husband and I heard the interview with Mary Roach on NPR independently of each other. It was the first time either one of us felt compelled to buy a book immediately. We were going by a book store that night so popped in and purchased it (after much searching with staff help). Spook was not disappointing! Roach's witty but irreverent style of writing is most entertaining. She tackles, from a very unscientific position, science's search for the soul, ghosts, spiritual mediums, reincarnation, out-of-body experiences and the like. I laughed the whole time I was reading it and not until the last line do we find out if she is a believer or skeptic. I am going to recommend this to my book club even. I've already recommended it to a number of friends.

After finishing Spook, I went out and bought her book, Stiff. I enjoyed learning about what happens to cadavers but I don't think my book club would be as keen on it. It maybe a touch gory for some.

I certainly look forward to Roach's next book. My hope is that she writes about consciousness next!

Please see a comedy instructor immediately, December 27, 2007
Spook is not a book about the afterlife. It's about Mary Roach's Zany Adventures With The Afterlife!, and to enjoy it, you better enjoy Mary Roach. Otherwise, this book will annoy the hell out of you.

Spook was a disappointing read. First off, let me say that I am not a believer, so please do not count me among the handful of one star reviews below from people clearly irritated that Roach did not take their beliefs seriously.

In the book, Roach covers a spread of supernatural topics, from ectoplasm and auras to near death experiences and seances. One thing you get out of the book is that a number of ridiculous modern paranormal beliefs harken back to shoddy science of the early 1900s spiritual movement that refused to die.

However, the book was disappointing for several reasons. The first is that Mary Roach professes to know very little about the subject and, modest or not, it's pretty clear after reading it that she does in fact know very little; and that further more, she did very little more than surface investigations for this book. I imagine part of the problem is the subject matter - this stuff ISN'T very deep to begin with, and certainly has little to no scientific basis to draw from.

But, for example, at one point, Roach goes to a weekend course in communicating with the dead. She is, predictably, surrounded by kooks and nutballs all of whom think they can communicate with the dead. And then the course ends, she's learned - predictably - nothing, and that's about it from that section of the paranormal world. To the reader, the weekend was clearly a wasted trip that would result in nothing more than comic anecdotes. On top of it are a number of stories and facts clearly garnered from Google searches, which really takes away from her abilities as a researcher.

Another problem: Roach really, really needs to take a course in comedy. The subject matter she's dealing with is so zany, so ridiculous, it is simply hilarious at times by just writing down what happened. Instead, Roach sticks in very, very obvious and forced jokes that really do nothing but detract for the humor at play. It's annoying at times, like a third rate Dave Barry. It would be like writing about people who bathe in Jello, then making a joke about how dumb they are for bathing in Jello. You don't have to - the reality is far funnier than any joke could be.

Overall, it's a scattered, fluffy read that serves more for a series of comic (yet not so comical) essays on crazy, zany paranormal stuff starring Mary Roach. Read it if you want a very light primer, but beware the horrible, horrible jokes to come.

Science writer researches the afterlife, July 30, 2006
Spook: Science Tackles the Afterlife. Mary Roach

Spook provides a light-hearted look at the current status of research into the existence and survivability of the soul. Mary Roach calls it "a book for people who would like very much to believe in a soul and in an afterlife for it to hang around in, but who have trouble accepting these things on faith." At the end of the book, she admits that she began this project "from a state of near absolute ignorance." This is one of the book's most endearing features, since the reader gets a glimpse of how Ms. Roach goes about researching a topic.

The book does not end up with a definitive answer. If science had proof for or against the afterlife, it would have been big news. So this is an exploration of the current state of the research. The author claims that she does not approach the topic as a debunking skeptic, but she does throw in a lot of humorous asides in an attempt to amuse as well as explore.

Chapter One, "You Again," is about reincarnation. Ms. Roach goes to India for a week to visit Kirti S. Rawat, director of the International Center for Survival. Her purpose is to accompany him as he examines a claimed case of reincarnation. She meets the child, his family, and the family of the deceased man that the child claims to be. She also runs into cultural differences in a society where many people believe in reincarnation and don't need scientific proof.

The second chapter is a historic discussion on past research by people who believed there was a soul. Questions such as whether the soul came from the sperm or the ovum, or whether it entered the fetus at some point in its development are reviewed. Also looked at are those who searched for the exact bodily organ that contained soul.

"How to Weigh a Soul" is the third chapter. It explores the research done to see if the soul has weight. If so, can a drop in weight at death be proof of the existence of the soul leaving? The famous experiment by Duncan Macdougall that determined the soul weighs 21 grams is reviewed as well as other more recent attempts. The fourth chapter goes on to look at the attempts to photograph or capture an image of the soul as it leaves the body.

The next couple of chapters delve into the claims of mediums who say they can establish communication with departed spirits. Chapter 5 is a history of the attempts by mediums to produce ectoplasm, a physical manifestation of spirit energy. Chapter 6 then goes on to look at current research with gifted mediums at the VERITAS Research Program of the University of Arizona conducted by Gary Schwartz. This is followed by the author taking a Fundamentals of Mediumship course at Arthur Findlay College in England.

Chapter 8 "Can You Hear Me Now?" looks into attempts to use technology to establish communication with dead souls. EVP (Electronic Voice Phenomena) on tape recorders and radio static is the current trend, but Ms. Roach also looks into the history of this field.

Chapter 9 begins a section where Ms. Roach looks to see if physical phenomena, rather than spirits, may cause the feelings of contact with the beyond. First she visits Dr. Michael Persinger at the Consciousness Research Lab at Laurentian University in Sudbury Ontario. He is studying the ability of complex electromagnetic fields to produce hallucinations that might resemble contact with the dead. Chapter 10 looks into whether low frequency sound waves (10 - 20 hertz) could do the same thing. Ms. Roach visits Vic Tandy who teaches at Coventry University whose research is in this area.

Chapter 11 is my personal favorite. It deals with a 1925 North Carolina ghost who appeared to his son to tell him where to find the most recent version of his will. The case went to court and the new will was accepted by the family. Both the old and new wills were on file in the courthouse, and Ms. Roach brings in the president of the American Society of Questioned Document Examiners. Although the family decided to accept the new will, it turns out to be a poor quality forgery. Yet the story of family intrigue is so interesting that the chapter left me wanting someone to write more about this case.

The last chapter looks into what Mary Roach feels is the most promising of the current research to prove the existence of the soul. Based on the reports of people who have had Near Death Experiences (NDEs) who claim they felt themselves rising out of their bodies and looking down on the room they are in, this research places an object that can only be seen from the ceiling in rooms where people might possibly experience an NDE. Interviews are then conducted to see if they experienced an NDE and saw the object. This research is being conducted by Bruce Greyson at the University of Virginia.

The books ends with a 13 page bibliography that goes chapter by chapter through the resources Mary Roach used for the book. Some may criticize her for attempting to write such a book without being an expert in the field. I find that her newness to the topic gives her a fresh unbiased perspective. However, I feel that she attempts to cover her inexperience with humor that sometimes detracts from the work. If you can endure the jokes, the information provided is well presented. ... Read more

Editorial Review

An omnibus edition celebrating a great scientific mind and a legendary American original including a live recording.Richard Feynman (1918-1988) thrived on outrageous adventures. In the phenomenal national bestsellers "Surely You're Joking, Mr. Feynman!" and "What Do You Care What Other People Think?" the Nobel Prize-winning physicist recounted in an inimitable voice his adventures trading ideas on atomic physics with Einstein and Bohr and ideas on gambling with Nick the Greek, painting a naked female toreador, accompanying a ballet on his bongo drums, solving the mystery of the Challenger disaster, and much else of an eyebrow-raising, hugely entertaining, and astounding nature. One of the most influential and creative minds of recent history, Feynman also possessed an unparalleled ability as a storyteller, a delightful coincidence celebrated in this special omnibus edition of his classic stories. Now packaged with an hour-long audio CD of the 1978 "Los Alamos from Below" lecture, Classic Feynman offers readers a chance to finally hear a great tale in the orator's own voice. ... Read more

Reviews

Two books in one + CD..., March 14, 2006
I have purchased almost all Feynman books so far.

Be forewarned. This book is a compilation of "Surely your joking..." and "What do you care what..." plus a bonus CD audio recording of a talk which was "in-te-res-ting" ( a Feynmanism).

If I had realized this, I would only have bought this book instead of all three.

For a more global and thorough exposition of his life, consider Gleick's '93 book "Genius".

For those wondering if they should find anything out about Feynman... There was a student that was asked if he wanted to come along to hear Feynman speak. "No. I'm going to study instead." Years later he was still kicking himself for passing up the opportunity. Feynman has this effect. Once you find out about him, you'll probably want to have done so earlier.

What's in store for you is a look back from the 20's to the 80's through the eyes of a physicist that married his sweet heart against the advice of family and lost her to tuberculosis a short time before a cure, rubbed elbows with the greats Einstein, Bohr, Dyson, Schwinger, Fermi etc, patrioticly worked on anti-aircraft defenses, helped build the atomic bomb, was bold enough to look at it directly behind a windshield that blocked the harmful ultra violet, cracked safes, deciphered Mayan hieroglyphs, learned to speak and taught in Portuguese, ironed out the problems in Quantum Electrodynamics, went around Caltech acting weird from a concussion for three weeks before any one noticed, "Well, next time say something!", he scolded. The '65 Nobel prize: "You'll raise more of a fuss if you refuse it.", learned to draw, play drums, inspired nanotechnologists, quantum computing research and after surviving 10 years of cancer helped trackdown the problem with the Space Shuttle Columbia and lastly said: "I'd hate to die twice. It's boring!"

If you like Feynman, you will like the CD very much!, November 18, 2008
The stories in the book are the same as those in the well known Surely you're joking and What do you care what other people think. I had read those (plus James Gleick's 'Genius'), but still liked this book very much because of the accompanying CD. Play the CD first, then read the stories again - that really made the stories come to live for me!

Highly Entertaining, June 28, 2008
This autobiography of the great physicist Richard Feynman should appeal to all those readers who want to know about his private life and scientific activities in detail.However, most of the material is taken from two previous books, "Surely you're joking, Mr Feynman" and "What do you care what other people think?". Some of the "adventures" were already related by James Gleick in his biography of Feynman, "Genius".So people who own these books can do without this one, unless they are real Feynman fans(like me!).
Another feature of this book is the CD which comes with it, and which contains a recording of a lecture by Feynman, covering most of the material of the Chapter entitled "Los Alamos from Below". I found this CD both entertaining and very useful, as it gives the listener a taste of what a lecture by Feynman sounded like. In fact, all the book, in its simplicity, sounds more like a series of lectures;and Feynman, in his distaste for "humanities", seems to enjoy "talking" to the public, with not a hint of literary artifice in his style!Of course, this could be seen as unbecoming such a brilliant mind, but Feynman keeps reminding the reader that he has no respect for anything but science(at one place, he talks about finding the professors of the philosophy department at Columbia particularly "inane").Some will also find his philandering a little exaggerated: but he is honest enough to admit that there is nothing he loves more than a "beautiful woman", and who could blame him?
Finally, it is worthwhile noting that, if some top-notch scientists had also literary gifts (two major examples being Poincar� and Einstein, whose writings are literary gems), Feynman couldn't care less: he even boasts that he does not give any importance to spelling mistakes, as long as the reader (or listener) understand what he is talking about! However, after reading his Nobel Banquet Speech , I was agreeably surprised with a much better style, which he even admits in the book. Talking about this speech, he says(p.343):"But then I said I received, all at once, a big pile of letters - I said it much better in the speech- reminding me of all the people that I knew; letters from childhood friends who jumped up when they read the morning newspaper and cried out 'I know him!he's that kid we used to play with and so on...'".Feynman seems to be quoting from memory, because this is not exactly what he said in the speech:"...victorious cries of 'I told you so' by those having no technical knowledge-their successful prediction being based on faith alone..."(see Nobelprize.org for the complete speech).

curious indeed, March 8, 2007
This is a wonderful read....a chance to listen to a great scientist with a wonderful quirky mind. It is all interesting, some of it very touching, but the part on the investigation of the Challenger explosion is a classic study in bureaucratic malingering.

Brilliant!, October 1, 2009
If Feynman were only a brilliant physicist he would have been an amazing man. But he was so much more. Reading this book I found that I really got to know what he was about. Every essay was interesting and entertaining. The man knew how to live life and if I manage to have half the experiences he did I well have had a great life. It seems like he was constantly exploring what the world had to offer. It is truly a shame he is no longer with us because I would have loved to hear him live. If you only care about physics this book is not for you but if you want to know about life in general this book is for you. He is truly and inspring and motivational figure. I intend to purchase more books and cds on Feynman.

A "M-U-S-T", July 22, 2008
I was introduced to "Surely You're Joking Mr Feynman" 10 years ago by a friend of mine. I read with delight that marvelous book many times ever since. I am glad that Mr Leighton took the time to put together all the adventures of that charming and "curious character". In doing so, he allows us the pleasure of reading them in a chronological order, giving us the possibility to brush a better picture of the man behind the adventures...

A absolute MUST!

great CD, August 30, 2010
This is mostly a recompilation of two earlier books, "Surely you're joking Mr. Feynman", and "What do you care what other people think?" with a bit of new material. The CD with Feynman telling the stories himself is itself worth the price of the book, even if you have the other two already.

Light reading, June 6, 2010
For a biography about a quantum scientist, this was very entertaining and not too technical. What a character! ... Read more

Editorial Review

STEPHEN W. HAWKING is widely believed to be one of the world’s greatest minds: a brilliant theoretical physicist whose work helped to reconfigure models of the universe and to redefine what’s in it. Imagine sitting in a room listening to Hawking discuss these achievements and place them in historical context. It would be like hearing Christopher Columbus tell of his journeys to the New World. This book approaches that. In The Theory of Everything, Hawking presents a series of seven lectures in which he lays out, perhaps more clearly and concisely than ever, the history of the universe as we know it. These essays capture not only the brilliance of Hawking’s mind but his characteristic wit as well. A great popularizer of science as well as a brilliant scientist, Hawking believes that advances in theoretical science should be "understandable in broad principle by everyone, not just a few scientists." In this book, he offers, for all who would take it, a voyage of discovery about the cosmos and our place ... Read more

Reviews

So how *does* this relate to A BRIEF HISTORY OF TIME?, November 21, 2004
"...minus several million for good thinking..."
- Zaphod Beeblebrox, THE HITCHHIKER'S GUIDE TO THE GALAXY

The above quote (and the score I've assigned to this book) aren't in reference to the text or the author, but to the publishers. Why anyone with the brains of a sea urchin would cross Professor Hawking as they seem to have done is beyond me.

Briefly, save your money and buy THE ILLUSTRATED BRIEF HISTORY OF TIME instead of THE THEORY OF EVERYTHING, even if you're a compulsive Hawking completist. Alert readers should notice that Hawking doesn't hold the copyright for THEORY OF EVERYTHING, and attempted to block its publication. It was originally titled THE CAMBRIDGE LECTURES: LIFE WORKS, and appears to have been drawn from some recordings of lectures given by the professor years ago. (See the professor's web site for details.)

The "vanilla" (i.e., not the ILLUSTRATED) THEORY OF EVERYTHING consists of an introduction, seven lectures, and an index, without *any* illustrations or diagrams. Out of curiosity, I compared a library copy of it with THE ILLUSTRATED BRIEF HISTORY OF TIME.

Unless otherwise noted, each of the 7 lectures corresponds to a chapter of the same name in BRIEF HISTORY, in some segments only with slightly different paragraphing and punctuation (and occasionally the kind of spelling errors that creep in when one transcribes audio narration to text, if I may speculate as to the cause).

I don't understand why anyone would prefer the less polished text of THEORY OF EVERYTHING to THE ILLUSTRATED BRIEF HISTORY OF TIME, which not only has updates for new areas of research, but has been revised and rearranged to explain things more gently to the layperson.

"Ideas About the Universe" is essentially an extract from "Our Picture of the Universe", the first chapter of BRIEF HISTORY, with about one sentence's worth of drift per paragraph.

BRIEF HISTORY's version of "The Expanding Universe" has a more gradual introduction to the methods of measuring distances to nearby stars, and explains technical terms that may be unfamiliar to the non-scientist, such as luminosity.

THEORY OF EVERYTHING really shows its age in "Black Holes" when compared to BRIEF HISTORY, as Hawking has not been idle in that area over the years. The illustrated edition of BRIEF HISTORY has had a fair bit of interesting material added to "Black Holes", especially regarding cosmic censorship and naked singularities (Hawking having made a few *more* bets on the subject with Preskill and Thorne, although he paid off the Cygnus X-1 wager).

"Black Holes Ain't So Black" lacks major blocks of clarification/explanation added by Hawking to the version in BRIEF HISTORY.

BRIEF HISTORY's version of "The Origin and Fate of the Universe" goes into more detail: about the kinds of particles that are predicted to have come out of the big bang, and what sort of results we'd expect to see today if the predictions hold, and the scientists who first put forward these theories. BRIEF HISTORY also contains a much longer version of the "open questions" section, leading more gradually up to the discussion of Guth's development of the inflationary model.

"The Direction of Time" corresponds to BRIEF HISTORY's "The Arrow of Time" (which is worth picking up just for the picture of the keeper of the U.S. cesium clock). BRIEF HISTORY goes into more detailed examples to explain what Hawking means by the psychological arrow of time, with the simplest kind of "computer": an abacus.

"The Theory of Everything" mainly corresponds to BRIEF HISTORY's more modestly titled "The Unification of Physics", which is much more up to date (string theories are still covered, but a lot more work has been done in that area over the years). The tail end of the lecture corresponds to the ending of BRIEF HISTORY's "Conclusion".

--

In summary, this is interesting stuff, but THE ILLUSTRATED BRIEF HISTORY OF TIME does it better.

Good introduction, but somewhat oversimplified., June 27, 2002
Stephen Hawking's The Theory of Everything is a short book that can act as an introduction to the subjects of cosmology raised by modern science, but the book is only that; I preferred his Brief History of Time to this work because it was longer, more detailed, and covered more ground. If you are looking for a very basic introduction to the current thinking of astrophysicists, this is a good book; if you really want to wrestle with the subject at length, you should buy a Brief History of Time, or one of Paul Davies works, such as About Time. If you are looking for a good lecture series on physics, Richard Feynman's Six Easy Pieces and its sequel, Six Not So Easy Pieces is really the finest of this genre.

That being said, the book does a good job in outlining the basic subject matter, discussing the development of the Big Bang theory, and the implications of both the general theory of relativity and quantum physics on the formation of the universe. Hawking is at his best when discussing singularities -- the points of the universe, such as black holes, where the laws of physics break down.

Excellent book, exceeded only by A Brief Hostory of Time, July 1, 2002
Hawking clearly fleshes out his important findings in this book, but it's essentially an abridged version of his earlier A Brief History of Time, and the recent The Universe In A Nutshell. His latest incarnation of singularity physics and grand unifying theory speculation offers no new research from the last three or so years, and virtually everything can be found in either A Brief History of Time or in Universe in a Nutshell. If you're trying to meet a paper deadline, buy this book. Otherwise, read his more detailed and illustrated works for better comprehension

Engaging introduction to the man and his work, March 23, 2003
This is a collection of seven related lectures by Hawking originally published in 1996 under the title, The Cambridge Lectures: Life Works. He does not cover as much ground here as in did in A Brief History of Time, but what he does cover he does so in a charming and engaging style. There are some few statements here that could be interpreted as less than modest--although not by me--and a mistaken prediction or two, which may be a reason that Hawking is not pleased with this book's publication. He might also object to the title, since neither a "Theory of Everything" nor a conclusive answer to the origin and fate of the universe are presented.

However, Hawking does address these questions, and his expression is interesting to read and has the agreeable characteristic of being laconic. There are no equations in the book, no mathematics as such, and everything is explained in language that would be intelligible to a high school student. There are the usual droll Hawking jokes about God and His intentions, facetious, epigram-like understatements (I have done a lot of work on black holes, and it would all be wasted if it turned out that black holes do not exist. p. 66) and witty asides about the convergence of politics on physics, as when he mentions a particle accelerator the size of the Solar System that "would not be funded under current economic conditions."

A good chunk of the book is devoted to black holes (about which Hawking is or was the world's foremost authority) and whether they have "hair" and "sweat" or not. Hawking avers on page 92 that if a primordial black hole is discovered "emitting a lot of gamma and X rays," he will get the Nobel Prize. This is an ironic lament since, as he explains later on, it is most likely that even if these very difficult to observe and very ancient black holes do exist, they are mostly evaporated by now, and so it is probable there will be no Nobel for Hawking.

He also discusses a "no boundary condition" (p.119) of the big bang universe which seems to begin and end in a singularity in real-time while in imaginary time there are no singularities, just beginning and ending poles, like the north and south poles of the finite, unbounded surface of the earth. (p. 139) I especially like this idea since it does away with the infinite singularity and the theological implications that some draw from such a beginning of the universe. As Hawking asks rhetorically, in a "completely self-contained" universe with no boundary or edge--a universe "neither created nor destroyed"--what place would there be for a creator? (p. 126)

He also addresses string theory, and I was pleased to read that he is no more enamored of all those little curled up dimensions than I am. He says the theory has several other problems that need to be worked out, not the least of which is that we still don't know whether all the infinities will cancel out. (p. 159)

Hawking closes with his ideas about the prospect for a Theory of Everything. He gives three possibilities: (1) There is a "complete unified theory which we will someday discover..." (2) There's no ultimate theory, "just an infinite sequence of theories that describe the universe more and more accurately." (3) There's no theory, period: "Events...occur in a random and arbitrary manner." He seems to like (1) believing "that there is a good chance...[for] a complete unified theory by the end of the century..." Apparently--since he is speaking from circa 1996--he means the twentieth century. In that case he's wrong since we haven't yet gotten such a theory.

For the record, I like (2). I think that our present "laws" are approximations that we will continue to improve on. I believe we develop the ability through science to better and better order our environment and to increase our knowledge. I don't believe we are actually discovering "ultimate truth."

Hawking asks here as he has elsewhere, "Why does the universe go to all the bother of existing?" Why is there anything at all? He believes that if we do discover a complete theory, we will then be able to answer this question, and then we would "know the mind of God."

Treading water, June 30, 2002
This book, like the theory of relativity, is something I can grasp for a brief period of time and then it slips away. The first chapters gave a fascinating history and mini-review of where we've been but as he progressed I could not get my mind around some of the concepts he was discussing and some of the basic terms he used weren't explained. Such is the fate when trying to appeal to a broader range of people. For me, Carl Sagan's works were much easier to understand. Hawking does an admirable job but if you do not have a science background, or are bent in that direction, this may not be the best book for you. For us poor huddled masses what Hawking needs to do is get a good ghost writer with a minimal science background and have the writer come up with analogies to what Hawking is discussing. I know I could have used some additional explaining when he started talking about the extra 20+ dimensions, singularities and the string theory. Around the string theory I stopped treading water and drowned. All in all though, I would like to see more of trying to explain science to us unwashed and sadly miss Sagan. Hawking is to be commended and I hopes he continues the attempts. I will attempt to read his future works in that direction.

lacks substance, July 21, 2002
This book provides a historical perspective of the events leading up to the quest for finding a unified theory. It is a very light read that can be finished in a couple of hours. In some points, Steven Hawking dwelves a little deeper, especially in his own work on blackholes. However, if the reader is looking for more substance, especially into today's challenges, then I recommend the following book, "The Elegant Universe: Superstrings, Hidden Dimensions, and the Quest for the Ultimate Theory" by Brian Greene.

A Fascinating Journey, June 23, 2002
This is a book that takes the most incomprehensible material, theories, and operations of our universe, and breaks them down to the simplest form. Using "balloon" analogies and simple descriptions, Hawking is able to simplify the theories of space, time, and, well, 'Everything' else. I loved this book! Whether you're a fan of science fact, or science fiction, this is a book that will expand your understanding and appreciation of our wonderful universe.

Read the "author"'s opinion on this book !, September 3, 2003
Pr. Hawking gives this opinion on this book ! The policy here is not to give URLs, so just search for Pr. Hawking homepage on the web and you will know... I quote : "We would urge you not to purchase this book in the belief that Professor Hawking was involved in its creation."

I suggest that you instead buy "A Brief History of Time" which is a terribly great book !

My comment on New Millenium Pr (publisher) is that it looks like they have little scruples... Who would try to make money on a disabled person ?

Professor Hawking did NOT authorize this Book, March 2, 2006
On his website, Professor Stephen Hawking claims he did NOT authorize the publication of this book under his name.

In a nut shell, June 9, 2007
The toughts of the supposed beginings of the universe are thought provoking. The book was easy to read, in fact this book took me no time at all, but has left me with a life time of knowledge. ... Read more

Editorial Review

How do imperceptibly small differences in the environment change one's behavior? What is the anatomy of a bad mood? Does stress shrink our brains? What does People magazine's list of America's "50 Most Beautiful People" teach us about nature and nurture? What makes one organism sexy to another? What makes one orgasm different from another? Who will be the winner in the genetic war between the sexes?

Welcome to Monkeyluv, a curious and entertaining collection of essays about the human animal in all its fascinating variety, from Robert M. Sapolsky, America's most beloved neurobiologist/primatologist. Organized into three sections, each tackling a Big Question in natural science, Monkeyluv offers a lively exploration of the influence of genes and the environment on behavior; the social and political -- and, of course, sexual -- implications of behavioral biology; and society's shaping of the individual. From the mating rituals of prairie dogs to the practice of religion in the rain forest, the secretion of pheromones to bugs in the brain, Sapolsky brilliantly synthesizes cutting-edge scientific research with wry, erudite observations about the enormous complexity of simply being human. Thoughtful, engaging, and infused with pop-cultural insights, this collection will appeal to the inner monkey in all of us. ... Read more

Reviews

Not what many expect, but outstanding., May 12, 2000
A group of students and I just finished reading THE LIVES OF A CELL as part of a readings in biology seminar this spring. Once you read the first 3-4 chapters it becomes obvious that there is not a central theme (or is there) for the book.

Contents of this book are a compilation of reflective articles originally published in a medical journal. Chapter topics range all over the place, but they present many topics drawn from biological thought prominent through the mid-1970s -- everything from molecular biology to Gaia to sociobiology.

There is a wealth of material here appropriate for discussion among undergraduate students, professionals, and perhaps even science-directed high school students. Each of the 29 chapters are about 3-5 pages long, can be easily digested, and beg to be reflected upon and discussed.

As for the writing, other Amazon reviewers have referred to the writing in this book as being poetic. While I didn't see so much of that, I was struck by Thomas' ability to turn a phrase, make a point, and discuss complex biological ideas in a manner that is easily understood. The writing in the book is a definite plus.

There are also times in the book where I can imagine Thomas grinning as he wrote, or, perhaps giving the occasional wink! He must have had a wonderful sense of humor.

OK, back to the theme...if there is one...it seems to me that one common theme of several of the chapters has to do with communication -- oral, chemical, behavioral, and genetic. Other possible themes include the fact that humans are "not all that." That we are part of the global system, not running it. Another possibility includes the idea that everything can be an analogy of the way that a cell works -- organelles, membranes, cellular processes, products, and so forth.

This is excellent reading for anyone interested in ideas about life and living. Well written, occasionally humorous, and intruiging.

5 stars!

AWESOME! A DEFINITE FOR ALL STUDENTS!, August 4, 2000
What can one say if you believe to have found the 'John Steinbeck' of science! I totally enjoyed his descriptive readings and perspectives of our magnificient world! Lewis Thomas has done an excellent job interpreting his thoughts on life through the language of science. He blends the two so delicately and precisely, that one starts to forget where the line between real life and scientific theory is drawn. Lewis Thomas found joy in science and it is illustrated in his essays. He manages to show the reader a peek at how a scientist like himself looks at the world.

I have chosen this book as one for all of my ninth grade Honors Biology students to read and report about. The book definitely makes the reader 'think'...you will not be able to just read one page after the other..one will need to keep a dictionary close by. Thomas uses quite alot of scientific terminology. It is definitely not for the lazy reader. It is for those individuals who read to learn more and enjoy the challenge of new vocabulary to broaden their own horizons in science or language itself. I enjoy giving my students a challenge and that is exactly what this book offers to the young mind.

Biology On A Cellular Level: Impressive, February 3, 2004
Lewis Thomas' book is a beautifully written collection of essays. He writes much in the style of the 13th century author Frederick Montaigne, whom he later writes an essay about in another book. The essays, combine to bring a truly penultimate view of biological life. His observations, more than conclusions, bring one very close to a belief that in some way, all life is connected.

In a particularly interesting essay on "organelles" Thomas points out that mitochondria, the engines of the cell in every animal, do not exchange DNA like every other part of the body in sexual procreation, but in fact, are passed directly from the ovum to the zygote in the cytoplasm, and never change or recombine their DNA.

This apparently being a protective mechanism developed over 100's of thousands of years because the preservation of the exact mitochondrial DNA sequence is so important, that it could not be left to chance, as are most every other characteristic of the animal.

Throughout the book, Thomas reveals truly extraordinary facts about biology and microbiology that tend to leave the reader in actual awe. For an incredibly interesting and fast education about cellular biology this National Book Award Winning collection is truly a fascinating read.

Short tales of biological fascination, April 24, 2001
At less than 150 pages, this book is packed with more biological insights than stupendous stacks of others. Dr. Thomas's description of how eukaryotic cells arose is a true marvel of how life adapts. He makes strong arguments that the biological norm is not competition but cooperation. The cells of our bodies were constructed when separate species of bacteria somehow decided that their long-term survival would be enhanced if they were to combine their specialized functions into a single cell. Such an event is truly extraordinary and may be the real miracle of life. It could turn out that simple single-celled life arises quite easily, but the combining of the separate species into a new, more complex cell is the rare event. Since it is apparently necessary for it to occur for intelligence to arise, that may be the reason why there is such an interstellar silence of signals from other intelligent species.
Despite his status as a physician, the author is also realistic about medicine. He describes his informal poll that physicians families receive less medical intervention than others and yet there is no alteration in their patterns of illness. His theses about how we generally get better more because it is in the nature of things for us to recover from illness than anything medical is advice that more people should take. He also argues that disease causing organisms are most often biological accidents, where the error is sometimes found on the human side. In these cases, the disease is a consequence of our bodies overreacting to the situation rather than anything the "infectious" agent does.
I was pointed towards this book by a college professor who told me that it would teach me more about biology than my current texts ever could. She was right and I learned much concerning how to marvel about what biology is all about from this book. Armed with that knowledge, it became, and still is, the most exciting subject I have ever studied.

your chance to meet Lewis Thomas, January 17, 2001
Lewis Thomas is who I want to be when I grow up - his writing is intelligent, witty, highly personable, full of fresh insights and passion for his subject matter: man and his home in the universe. Lives of a Cell is the book that jumpstarted my interest in biology over twenty years ago.

"Viewed from the distance of the moon, the astonishing thing about the earth, catching the breath, is that it is alive." - so begins the essay "The World's Biggest Membrane", in which he likens the earth with its atmosphere to a cell with its membrane. "The photographs show the dry, pounded surface of the moon in the foreground, dead as an old bone. Aloft, floating free beneath the moist, gleaming membrane of bright blue sky, is the rising earth, the only exuberant thing in this part of the cosmos. [...] It has the organized, self-contained look of a live creature, full of information, marvelously skilled in handling the sun."

What other science writer manages to surprise and delight you at every turn of a phrase? What other poet brings the incredible precise detail and the easy authority of a practising scientist? What other essayist ranges from the smallest part of a cell to the solar system with equal curiosity and interest and yet always manages to keep man in focus?

Lewis Thomas opened up a whole niche of science writing by showing its immense appeal, which is yet not mass appeal. Writers and thinkers as highly talented and diverse as Natalie Angier and Diane Ackerman have settled in this niche, and have prospered there.

If you never read anything else, read this, December 5, 1999
I was given a copy of _Lives of a Cell_ when I was in ninth grade. I read the first essay, didn't think much of it, and left the book alone for a couple of months. Then I picked it up again and wow! Thomas writes about mitochondria, ants, the Gaia hypothesis, and so much more! I've spent many hours reading and rereading this breathtaking book. It does require a knowledge of high-school level biology (the essays were aimed at doctors) and a pretty good vocabulary, but it is nowhere near as difficult as some reviewers would have you believe. Read this book!

A Real Brain-Stretcher, October 29, 2000
I am a ninth grade honors biology student that was assigned to read The Lives of a Cell about 6 weeks ago. My regret is that I put off reading it to almost the last minute. When I finally did read it, I found that it was a very well written book, and that it really made you think about the world and your surroundings in a totally different aspect! The book uses a lot of scientific terms that I didn't know of until I read the book with my trusty dictionary at my side. I reccomend this book to everyone that has the slightest interest in science, but don't think that you can just quickly skim through the book, it will take time to fully understand all of Thomas' thoughts. This book has a lot of information- not only on science, but on language and various other things as well. This was a great challenge and I'm glad to have had the oppourtunity to have read such an intriguing book. Very thought provoking!! Very Interesting!!!

Excellent, thought-provoking, beautifully written, October 27, 1999
Many years ago, my father, a research chemist, introduced me to this book, as well as Thomas' other best seller, The Medusa and the Snail. The connections Thomas draws between the fascinating facts of biological life and the meaning of human life as a part of that grand scheme, are truly inspirational. As a teacher, writer and lover of the English language, I continue to marvel at his talent for expressing difficult ideas in fresh and flowing prose. I'm glad to know that his work is now studied by students in high school and college. I only wish that more of them were equipped to fully appreciate his extraordinary skill, intellect and gentle humor.

An interesting book by any measure, March 13, 2002
Look, it's not as smooth a read as Microcosmos--BUT, it is very interesting, and would make an excellent follow up to Margullis and Sagan's book Microcosmos. This book gets a bit farther into the development of human sexual traits than Microscosmos (of course, one can and should buy a copy of "What is Sex" by Margullis and Sagan if they are that curious) However, it reflects well on both books should they be read back to back as I have. It is difficult for a person like me--with a limited understanding of cell biology---to find easily understood books on the subject. This is one. I highly recomend Thomas' book to anyone who wants to understand the biology of humanity.

Not just cellular biology here...and not just for scientists, July 17, 2000
Published in 1974, this book was a collection of short, mostly easily digestible essays that had originally appeared in the New England Journal of Medicine. Sounds like it's going to be heady stuff, and the title suggests that we'll be dealing primarily (or solely) with cellular biology. Well, it's heady enough, but truly not inaccessible to the layman. And the essays cover a good deal more ground than microbiology.

I can't help wonder if we might have been better served if the subtitle "Notes of a Biology Watcher" had been the actual title. It might have kept many potential readers from being scared off. The actual themes covered range from bacilli to Bach, from lymphocytes to language. And by the time you've finished this collection, you'll be convinced of connections you never even considered before.

The trick is to get through the first essay, the essay that gives the volume its title. That's where you'll find most of the scientific vocabulary and jargon. Someone below suggested that you need a background in high school level biology to follow--well, I found college level biology didn't really help me all that much. Not panicking, and just plowing through seemed to do the trick for me. However, I did have a friend's advance warning that it would get better (meaning "easier," I'm sure) thereafter. And it did.

Thereby hangs my one criticism. A preface--maybe by someone like Joyce Carol Oates, who wrote the original NY Times review of the book--would have helped enormously. Something that in effect, said, "I'm a non-scientist too, and I loved it..." may have provided lay readers with enough encouragement to continue reading until, lo and behold, they start to "get it." And you will, if you have any interest at all in biological science and sufficient openness to begin to grasp what Lewis is putting forth here. What it all leads to is that sense of awe at the universe that author popular scientific writers (Sagan, Eiseley) also exhibit. But Lewis Thompson does it as well as anyone. I will be returning to his books again and again. ... Read more

Editorial Review

A small revolution is remaking the world. The only problem is, we can’t see it. This book uses dazzling images and evocative descriptions to reveal the virtually invisible realities and possibilities of nanoscience. An introduction to the science and technology of small things, No Small Matter explains science on the nanoscale.

Authors Felice C. Frankel and George M. Whitesides offer an overview of recent scientific advances that have given us our ever-shrinking microtechnology—for instance, an information processor connected by wires only 1,000 atoms wide. They describe the new methods used to study nanostructures, suggest ways of understanding their often bizarre behavior, and outline their uses in technology. This book explains the various means of making nanostructures and speculates about their importance for critical developments in information processing, computation, biomedicine, and other areas.

No Small Matter considers both the benefits and the risks of nano/microtechnology—from the potential of quantum computers and single-molecule genomic sequencers to the concerns about self-replicating nanosystems. By making the practical and probable realities of nanoscience as comprehensible and clear as possible, the book provides a unique vision of work at the very boundaries of modern science.

Editorial Review

Reviews

Startling Sermons, September 9, 2003
Charles Darwin said that there was grandeur in his view of life produced by natural selection, but it was not all a pretty picture. He wrote his friend Joseph Hooker in 1856: "What a book a Devil's Chaplain might write on the clumsy, wasteful, blundering low and horridly cruel works of nature." Richard Dawkins has taken the quotation for the title of a collection of his writings, A Devil's Chaplain: Reflections on Hope, Lies, Science, and Love (Houghton Mifflin). Darwin also wrote of a particular wasp: "I cannot persuade myself that a beneficent and omnipotent God would have designedly created the Ichneumonidae with the express intention of their feeding within the living body of caterpillars." But as Darwin (and Dawkins) would remind us, the evolutionary process has produced wonderfully designed creatures, and a wasp who cares for its young by letting them hatch within a hapless caterpillar is simply doing a competent job of getting the young off to a good start. It might be distasteful to us (and should have been to a supreme being), but nature just doesn't care. It isn't kindness of the mother wasp, or cruelty to the caterpillar, but simply amoral nature.

But as chaplain, Dawkins notes that while wasps and caterpillars can do nothing about such amorality, we can. "At the same time as I support Darwinism as a scientist, I am a passionate anti-Darwinian when it comes to politics and how we should conduct our human affairs." There is no inconsistency here any more than in the physician who studies cancer, but is bent on eliminating it. And as devil's chaplain, Dawkins urges us to use our evolution-given brains, reject the pacifiers of faith in immortality, and rejoice in our short lives because they are all we have. Dawkins, you see, besides being an eminent Darwinian whose books like The Blind Watchmaker have wonderfully well laid out what evolution means, is also possibly the world's most famous atheist. You will find here his views on religious beliefs and creationists (or their newest incarnation as advocates of Intelligent Design), of course, but on "alternative medicine," crystal healing, homeopathy, and so on. Besides the rants, there is good humor and some warm tributes to friendship, especially in his memorials to his friends Douglas Adams and Stephen Jay Gould. The final chapter, "A Prayer for My Daughter," is a letter he wrote to her when she turned ten, to let her know how he thought she should select what to believe. The great question to ask in all disputes: "What kind of evidence is there for that?"

Readers will be reminded of the belligerence of Thomas Henry Huxley, "Darwin's Bulldog," but evolution is only one theme here. Included is his hilarious review of the book by the hoaxer Alan Sokal who submitted a nonsense paper to a postmodern journal and had it accepted. He rages against postmodernism, with its "all views are equal" stance making his scientific view equivalent to a voodoo view. He expresses his doubts about the jury system, and in a wonderful chapter ("Genes Aren't Us") discounts just how important genes are for personality. Another chapter makes us wonder at just how close we are to our ape cousins. Throughout, he is witty, and above all informative on a wide-range of subjects, not just on his refusal to accept what he sees as the diverse delusions of most of the world. Anyone who has admired his previous writings of science popularization will find these personal essays to be very appealing sermons from an accomplished chaplain.

A revealing collection of essays by a passionate scientist, December 8, 2003
One of the wonderful things about this book is the sense that one gets of a distinguished scientist letting his hair down, as it were, and discoursing informally on a number of interesting subjects including some outside his area of expertise. In the game of "Who would you invite to dinner if you could choose anybody?" Oxford University Professor Richard Dawkins, author of The Selfish Gene, and other important works on evolution, would be near the top of my list.

Not that I agree with everything he says. Indeed, that is part of the fun. Dawkins is adamant on some subjects, religion being one of them. A goodly portion of this book is devoted to letting us know exactly how he feels about the "God hypothesis," "liberal agnostics," and the so-called miracles recognized by especially the Catholic Church. The title of Chapter 3.3, "The Great Convergence" (of science and religion), for example, is used ironically. He sees no convergence; in fact, he calls such a notion "a shallow, empty, hollow, spin-doctored sham." (p. 151)

Clearly Dawkins is not a man to mince words. But his insistence on a restrictive definition of "God" as "a hypothetical being who answers prayers; intervenes to save cancer patients...forgives sin," etc., is really the problem. He considers the "religion" attributed to scientists like Einstein, Carl Sagan, Paul Davies and others (and even himself!) to involve a misuse of the term, calling such a definition "flabbily elastic" and not religion as experienced by "the ordinary person in the pew." (p. 147)

But what Dawkins is really railing against is the illegitimacy of believing in the supernatural and science at the same time.

While I think Dawkins makes a good point with this argument, I think it would be better to make a distinction between fundamentalist religion, which has been, and continues to be, the root cause of much of the horror in the world, and the more progressive varieties which recognize the limitations of the barbaric "Bronze-Age God of Battles." See Chapter 3.5 "Time to Stand Up" in which Dawkins rightly condemns the hatreds and violent history of the three middle eastern religions. At the same time I think he needs to realize that it is legitimate to define "God" as God is defined in, for example, the Vedas; that is, as The Ineffable, which has no attributes, about which nothing can be said.

However it is exactly his point that there is no evidence for the God hypothesis and that to partially accept such a notion, or even to be "agnostic" is to depart from a purely scientific viewpoint. In this I think the atheistic Dawkins is mistaken. Absence of proof is not proof of absence, period. And as far as religion, per se, goes, I would add that not only is religion part of human culture (for better or for worse), but is also part of the so-called "extended phenotype" of human beings, and not something that is going to be argued away.

I also have some reservations about his reasons for not debating with creationists. He believes that to debate with them gives them a legitimacy they don't deserve. In Chapter 5.5, he reveals a letter he wrote to Steven Jay Gould expressing such a view. I don't debate creationists either, but my reason is that creationists don't really debate. They have already made up their minds and are not capable of being influenced by evidence. Theirs is purely an exercise in propaganda. Furthermore, as Dawkins discovered himself (in Chapter 2.3 on the Australian film crew that he allowed into his house for an interview), it is often the case that creationists don't play fair.

In Chapter 1.5 "Trial by Jury" Dawkins presents his reservations about "one of the most conspicuously bad good ideas anyone ever had." I understand his demurral, but would like to point out that juries dispense a social justice; that the tribe makes its decisions based on what it perceives as good for the tribe now, not necessarily what's true in an objective or scientific sense.

Interesting enough, Dawkins demonstrates his knowledge of other scientific subjects, including physics, and he does it very well. I was particularly impressed with his explanation of entropy and how it effects the evolutionary process in Chapter 2.2. (See especially page 85.) He also does a fine job of elucidating why Lamarckism cannot work without a "Darwinian underpinning" since there must be a mechanism for selecting between the acquired characteristics that are improvements and those that are not. (p. 90) Good too is his characterization of genes as constituting "a kind of description of the ancestral environments through which those genes have survived." (p. 113)

On his tiff with Gould, Dawkins attempts to make amends by reprinting some semi-gracious and mostly positive reviews of some of Gould's books; however it is obvious that his professional and emotional differences with Gould remain.

One of the most important points that Dawkins reaffirms here is his belief that we humans, because of our unique insight into ourselves and our predicament, "can rebel against the tyranny of the selfish replicators." (p. 11) What Dawkins means is that we do not have to take biology as destiny or to take Darwinism as a template for our morality--a point often missed by his critics.

There is much, much more of interest in this refreshingly personal collection of essays by one of our most original evolutionary thinkers, some of it first rate, and some of it rather ordinary; yet taken in total reveals a lot about Richard Dawkins, scientist, science writer, teacher, and human being that I was pleased to learn.

Incidentally, the title is from Charles Darwin who speculated on how such a personage might regard "the clumsy, wasteful, blundering low and horridly cruel works of nature." (p. 8)

That "devil's chaplain" here is Richard Dawkins himself who mostly directs his ire toward the stupidities of human beings.

A response to middle America, October 2, 2003
I'd just like to briefly respond to the "reader from middle America" who I feel is over-reacting a little to Dawkins' book.

Dawkins' main target is not what I'd call 'traditional theists', but that group of what's usually labelled "fundamentalists" who are trying to suppress science teaching and replace it with their bogus "creation science".

I know plenty of intelligent people who believe in a God. I don't know any that believe in the literal "created in six days" word of the bible or who think a belief in evolution is absolutely antithetical to religious belief.

The majority of denominations - and thus Christians - don't subscribe to the fundamentalist view (don't take my word for it, do a quick search). In fact most explicitly disavow a literal reading of Genesis. So it's entirely wrong for "middle America" to speak of creationism as a "majority" belief.

Dawkins does take a fairly militant stance. Although I share his views, I initially felt he was being a bit hard on those he disagrees with. However when I read of people seeking to have creationism ranked as "science" in schools at the exclusion of real science I think he's right to get stuck into them.

Dawkin's target isn't "middle America" or the majority of believers for whom belief in God and science can coexist. His target is what we call in Australia "the loudmouth ratbag fringe" who want to foist their view on others. And he's got me on side.

Incidentally, his broadside at postmodernism is just as much fun to read as his views on 'creation science'.

A Devils Chaplain, August 24, 2006
Richard Dawkins is one of the most influential and controversial essayists of today. A renowned evolutionary biologist, he currently holds the Charles Simonyi Chair at Oxford University. In his book A Devils Champlain he brings together 25 years and some of his best and most polemic essays (some previously unpublished) with subjects dealing with everything from love to evolution.
He employs his analytical passion to raise some mind-blowing questions and does not back down from challenging what many people consider as fundamental truths. He analyzes very intricate topics and situations through a scientific lens and is able to do it with clarity and simplicity. Although he has been criticized for some strong anti-religions standpoints and instances were his bias affects his writing; I believe that his work, even if you don't agree with it, is worth reading for he definitely makes some very valid points.
I believe Richard Dawkins is one of the elite essayist because of his ability to take on such complex beliefs, brake it down systematically and with the use of some philosophy prove his point; all while keeping a clear and simple style. He displays mastery in several subjects including, but not restricted to physics, biology and philosophy.
This book is divided into seven sections, each with a preamble. These sections are themselves made up of short and varied articles enabling reader is also able to jump from section to section and read different pieces since the order is not overly central. This complemented by his concise style making for a very easy read.
This book is not only a great read but it could change the way you think about some of the most basic things in you're life and will force you to re-analyze several aspects of today's society. I trust that this book made me a more knowledgeable person and taught me to question everything, extending to the things society considers self evident.
My favorite article titled "Trial by Jury" scientifically analyzes the system of trial by jury. This is a system in which the vast majority of the world ardently believes in, and is regarded as the closest humanly possible method of reaching justice. Growing up in America I was a firm believer that it was the ultimate system but after having read the article, in which Dawkins makes some undeniable points against it, I have come to question this system. However, this is the same reaction I had to many of his other articles where he questions things such as truth, religion, and the existence of god.
It is definitely a great introduction to anyone that is interested in Richard Dawkins work. It is one of his more concise pieces in which he reaches concert solutions, and a great prologue to his more intricate and ideological works.

Love Letters to Science and Rationality, February 15, 2005
Three Cheers!!!

This isn't merely a collection of essays from an esteemed old friend - it's a comprehensive review of the natural (and scientific) way of experiencing our world..."We already know that our senses are easily deceived...the lessons that conjurors, the honest variety and the imposters, teach us is that an uncritical faith in our own senses is not an infallible guide to truth." Here is the place for evidence, and eventually the scientific method. "Evolution gave us a brain whose size increased to the point where it became capable of understanding its own provenance, of deploring the moral implications and of fighting against them." Here is his advocacy of a system of ethics to deal with our evolved amoral tendencies. Some of the most beautiful prose I've ever read is the letter to his daughter, titled "Good and Bad Reasons For Believing." His take home message - show me the evidence. Elsewhere, he relates an interviewer pushing Carl Sagan for a premature answer. Asked, "But what is your gut feeling," Sagan replied, "I try not to think with my gut."

Dawkins visits several old friends. His writings involving S. J. Gould are GREAT fun to read!! Gould was a colorful character and colleague who Dawkins frequently sparred with publicly. Dawkins comments on some semi-resolutions, some non-resolutions, and some "this shouldn't have been an issue anyway" items, and is not to be missed.

For the hard-core computer geek, this is a gold mine: "The genetic code is truly digital, in exactly the same way as computer codes. This is not some vague analogy, it is the literal truth. Moreover, unlike computer codes, the genetic code, with a few minor exceptions, is identical in every living creature, from sulfur bacteria to giant redwood trees, from mushrooms to men...the present Luddism (fear of technology) over genetic engineering may die a natural death as the computer-illiterate generation is superseded."

For those who just prefer a light-hearted good time, turn to the chapter on postmodernism. Along with other morsels of gaity, Alan Sokal's hoax on the "cultural studies" area of postmodernism is presented. Sokal wondered if he could write a paper bad enough so that any college physics student would become hysterical with laughter, but good enough so that a leading postmodernist periodical would publish it. Unfortunately for the "Social Text," the answer was yes.

Now...ahem, about religion. Yes, Dawkins takes his patented "no prisoners" approach. "To describe religion as mind viruses is sometimes interpreted as contemptuous or hostile. It is both...as a lover of truth, I am suspicious of strongly held beliefs that are unsupported by evidence: fairies, unicorns, werewolves...the alleged convergence between (science and religion) is a shallow, empty, spin-doctored sham." There are 4 1/2 chapters with nothing but well-thought out comments on religion. Other phrases, lines and paragraphs of like thought are scattered throughout the book. Dawkins is one of the first authors I read who verbalized my own attitudes about religion. Since my early life was Baptist and I am still surrounded by conservative thinkers, these writings are like an oasis in the desert. Whatever one's belief, it seems to me the opposition should know what Dawkin's group is saying and why they're saying it.

I LOVED this book!!!

5 Enthusiastic Stars!!!

Darwin's Dangerous Disciple strikes again!, September 21, 2003
To some, Richard Dawkins is threatening. His phrases pry open shut minds. His words bend and flex rigid thinking. His ideas trash dearly held dogmas. And, of course, he idolizes The Devil's Chaplain - Charles Darwin [the title is from a letter of Darwin's]. He performs all these feats with a graceful style - one which anyone writing science should study. This collection is comprised of letters, book reviews and even eulogies - an unusual vehicle for espousing the cause of rational thinking. If much of his writing seems intense, it's because he recognizes his role in waging an uphill battle against "established truths", no matter how false they prove. To show the validity of truth over myth requires a direct approach.

Dawkins recognizes that people abhor being called animals. The continuity of life, one of the major themes in this collection, remains an indisputable fact, he stresses. This series reinforces Dawkins' attempts to make us aware that we are part of Nature. He is always witty, using his sound scientific basis and rationale to keep us informed. Science, in his view, must not be eroded by baseless tradition nor false dogmas. The goal of living, he argues, is the understanding of life itself. Religion and philosophy have failed abysmally, the realm of science should be given its opportunity. It's a broad view, sustained by an ability to grasp it firmly. Better yet, for us, it's presented here with verve and dedication.

Segregated into [lucky!] seven sections, each addressing a general theme. He covers many topics in this anthology - evolution, of course, but medicine, genetically modified foods [many foods are hybrids resulting from genetic manipulation], jury trials, intellectual heresies, and even government policies are included. The arrangement presents no difficulty - in fact, each offering might be chosen at random without losing any impact. Selecting a favourite is an arduous task [although it promotes re-reading] but the review of Sokal and Bricmont's "Fashionable Nonsense" ranks very high. The review demonstrates Dawkins' many talents, from insight to incisiveness. Few essayists provide the imagery he can attain to explain an idea.

There are those, particularly adherents of the idea that science lacks morality, who see scientists as cold and distant. Dawkins shows how false this idea is with his laudatory comments on John Diamond, Douglas Adams and William Hamilton. He even extends an olive branch to his academic opponent, the late Stephen J. Gould. As fellow evolutionists, Dawkins and Gould forged a rapport against the rants and duplicities of the Christian creationists. It requires a broad mind to take such steps, and narrowness isn't among Dawkins' blemishes. He's a feeling human being and a tireless campaigner. We would all do well to heed and emulate him. [stephen a. haines - Ottawa, Canada]

In Defense of the Scientific Method, June 9, 2004
If you only read one book by Professor Richard Dawkins, I recommend The Selfish Gene. That book is a remarkable tour de force covering the latest thinking about how evolution really works by taking into account our understanding of genetic qualities in reinforcing the evolutionary struggle of the survival of the fittest.

By contrast, A Devil's Chaplain is a book that will appeal primarily to people who have read several books by Professor Dawkins and would like to know more about him as a person and his views outside of neo-Darwinism.

If you have not read anything by Professor Dawkins, I recommend you skip this book unless you have a thorough understanding of the latest evolutionary theories. Much of the book won't make sense to you otherwise.

A Devil's Chaplain is a series of essays (some published before and some not), laments, eulogies and a letter to his daughter. From these materials, you can learn more about how Professor Dawkins sees his colleagues, those who oppose evolutionary teachings, postmodernists, and his personal views on religious beliefs and "alternative" medicine. Much of what he says will not surprise you. As a scientist, he favors the scientific method and is rationally skeptical of anything that cannot be proven by this method. He is also annoyed by a society that grants prominent opportunities to share views that are not proven by scientific methods. As a result, he is also an atheist . . . but one who draws great joy from considering the world around him and the methods by which it has been created.

Many people think of atheists as gloomy people, or people without much emotion. Professor Dawkins is neither. His loving descriptions of relations with his colleagues, rivals and mentors show just the opposite. His concern for using scientific methods is obviously also based on a desire to help people live better lives.

Catholics may find the book a little annoying in that Professor Dawkins likes to challenge some of the "faith"-based beliefs that that religion espouses.

As I finished the book, I found that I was most attracted to the advanced speculations that Professor Dawkins used in his book that speak directly to evolutionary studies. I especially recommend the essay, "Son of Moore's Law," where he describes the timing of when individual genomes will be economically affordable and how that will influence health and medical treatments. I was also drawn to the essays that describe his optimistic belief that we can escape our evolutionary heritage and evolve into people who produce the best possible future for all.

There's much food for thought here. I doubt if any religious believers will be undone by his arguments. I also doubt that he will convert any people who believe in the literal creation as described in the Bible to change their views.

Ultimately, I was left wondering how other prominent scientists bridge the gap between their scientific methods and having a rich religious life.

I graded the book down one star because the editor presumes the reader has a little too much familiarity with the leading lines of thought about evolution. The book could have used more footnotes to explain the background of the points Professor Dawkins is making for those of us who are not evolutionary biologists . . . but simply like to read books about the subject.

Richard Dawkins: "blessed with brains.", January 17, 2004
Richard Dawkins (THE SELFISH GENE, UNWEAVING THE RAINBOW) is an evolutionary biologist at Oxford and a self-proclaimed "passionate Darwinian" (p. 10). In fact, it was Charles Darwin who first coined the phrase "Devil's Chaplain" in 1856. For Darwin, a Devil's Chaplain recognizes the "clumsy, wasteful, blundering low and horridly cruel" forces of nature at work in the process of natural selection. In his brilliant collection of articles, lectures, tirades, book reviews, essays and eulogies, Dawkins reveals that while Darwin's theory of evolution may be "bleak and cold," natural selection has also given us humans the biggest gifts of all: "the gift of understanding the ruthlessly cruel process that gave us all existence; the gift of revulsion against its implications; the gift of foresight--something utterly foreign to the blundering short-term ways of natural selection--and the gift of internalizing the very cosmos" (p. 12). Stated differently, while sharks may outswim us, cheetahs may outrun us, elephants may outpower us, and redwoods may outlive us, we are bipedal apes "blessed with brains" capable of understanding our precious existence (pp. 12-13).

When it comes to understanding the nature of our existence, Dawkins' book reveals that he is more highly evolved than most humans. His book may be read as a collection of brilliant love letters to science and rationality, in which he insightfully examines a variety of subjects through the eyes of an evolutionary scientist: Darwinism, morality, jury trials, religion (which he compares to computer viruses), education, genetically modified foods, Africa, genetics, the New-Age fascination with crystals, September 11th, and infant indoctrination. As a lover of truth, Dawkins not only reveals his suspicions of strongly-held beliefs that are unsupported by evidence (p. 117), but he never ceases to revel in science as a source of poetry and wonder. Never afraid to confront a good controversy, Dawkins' collection is sure to antagonize creationists, Roman Catholics, fundamentalists, New Age gurus and paranormal preachers alike. Intellectually stimulating and highly recommended.

G. Merritt

A MANUAL TO THE TRUTH REVEALED BY SCIENCE, July 2, 2004
Dawkins is a well known biologist whose "The Selfish Gene" revolutionized the way we think (or ought to think) about evolution.

In this book, he puts together a collection of essays which, in the essence, is a guidebook to non-scientists to debunking pseudo-science. He does so in a variety of ways:
1. He demonstrates how complex physics concepts are used in literature to seem more scientific.
2. He shows how creationists seek legitimacy in the public eye with scientific sounding ideas like "intelligent design" and others which are nothing more than pseudo-science. He also offers ideas on how to deal with them.
3. He points out, in an open letter to his daughter, how to know what is truth and what isn't, what are good and bad reasons to believe something.
4. He recommends a number of follow up readings in his book reviews. These are mainly on Stephen Jay Gould and Peter Medawar, two other famed biologists who write for the general public.

The essence of the book is reflected, I believe, in the last essay, in which he makes the point that evidence is the only way to truth and knowledge, and the basis of science. He shows that evidence is a better reason to believe something than its three foes: authority, revelation and tradition.

I highly recommend this book to anyone looking for intelligent arguments and thoughts on a wide variety of subjects, all related to science, its importance and its usage (or lack thereof) in society.

The Great Ocean of Truth, February 10, 2004
Isaac Newton described himself as a boy, playing on the seas shore, "whilst the great ocean of truth lay all undiscovered before me." Charles Darwin explored the great ocean of genetic heritage from which all life has emerged. Dawkins explains the concepts of genetics and biological evolution to a nonprofessional audience, in terms and images that are clear and understandable even to those with no scientific training. I have saved this book and will give to my son to read when he studies biology in high school next year. Dawkins essays radiate intelligence and common sense, as well as a deep and passionate appreciation for the complexities of nature -- that is, for the truth that is exponentially more awe-inspiring, beautiful and fascinating than the nonsensical, repressive and, in may cases -- fear-inspired fantasies of the anti-science fundamentalists. Also, as a former academic who was amazed and repelled that any putative scholar could waste a moment of time on the hot air and charlatanism of deconstruction, I thoroughly enjoyed Dawkin's account of Sokal's hoax, in which a noted physics professor foisted an article that consisted of total gibberish on Social Text, a major post-modernist journal. The debate between Dawkins and Gould, so warmly and decently presented by Dawkins in these essays, provide a model of academic discourse that might well be replicated in the so-called humanities. ... Read more

Editorial Review

“Comprehensive, readable, and replete with current, useful examples, this book provides a much-needed explanation of how to be a critical consumer of the scientific claims we encounter in our everyday lives.”

–April Cordero Maskiewicz, Department of Biology, Point Loma Nazarene University

“Seethaler’s book helps the reader look inside the workings of science and gain a deeper understanding of the pathway that is followed by a scientific finding–from its beginnings in a research lab to its appearance on the nightly news.”

–Jim Slotta, Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, University of Toronto

“How I wish science was taught this way! Seethaler builds skills for critical thinking and evaluation. The book is rich with examples that not only illustrate her points beautifully, they also make it very interesting and fun to read.”

–Julia R. Brown, Director, Targacept, Inc.

Don’t Get Hoodwinked! Make Sense of Health and Science News...and Make Smarter Decisions!

Every day, there’s a new scientific or health controversy. And every day, it seems as if there’s a new study that contradicts what you heard yesterday. What’s really going on? Who’s telling the truth? Who’s faking it? What do scientists actually know—and what don’t they know? This book will help you cut through the confusion and make sense of it all—even if you’ve never taken a science class! Leading science educator and journalist Dr. Sherry Seethaler reveals how science and health research really work...how to put scientific claims in context and understand the real tradeoffs involved...tell quality research from junk science...discover when someone’s deliberately trying to fool you...and find more information you can trust!  Nobody knows what new controversy will erupt tomorrow. But one thing’s for certain: With this book, you’ll know how to figure out the real deal—and make smarter decisions for yourself and your family!

Watch the news, and you’ll be overwhelmed by snippets of badly presented science: information that’s incomplete, confusing, contradictory, out-of-context, wrong, or flat-out dishonest. Defend yourself! Dr. Sherry Seethaler gives you a powerful arsenal of tools for making sense of science. You’ll learn how to think more sensibly about everything from mad cow disease to global warming–and how to make better science-related decisions in both your personal life and as a citizen.

You’ll begin by understanding how science really works and progresses, and why scientists sometimes disagree. Seethaler helps you assess the possible biases of those who make scientific claims in the media, and place scientific issues in appropriate context, so you can intelligently assess tradeoffs. You’ll learn how to determine whether a new study is really meaningful; uncover the difference between cause and coincidence; figure out which statistics mean something, and which don’t.

Seethaler reveals the tricks self-interested players use to mislead and confuse you, and points you to sources of information you can actually rely upon. Her many examples range from genetic engineering of crops to drug treatments for depression...but the techniques she teaches you will be invaluable in understanding any scientific controversy, in any area of science or health.

^   Potions, plots, and personalities: How science progresses, and why scientists sometimes disagree

^   Is it “cause” or merely coincidence? How to tell compelling evidence from a “good story”

^   There are always tradeoffs: How to put science and health claims in context, and understand their real implications

^   All the tricks experts use to fool you, exposed! How to recognize lies, “truthiness,” or pseudo-expertise

Editorial Review

From his bestseller Wonderful Life to his splendid essays on endlessly interesting variations of evolution, Gould has raised the art of scientific writing to new heights. "Whether his topic is typewriter design, the technical triumph of Voyager or Joe DiMaggio's hitting streak, Gould holds our attention."--Publishers Weekly. Photos and drawings. ... Read more

Reviews

extraodinary range, intellectual but in laymans terms - wonderful, January 2, 2006
I have really enjoyed Stephen Jay Gould. His range of essays and the scope of topics he discusses has always interested me, as has in ability to draw from what is clearly a profoundly wide range of material which covers literature, history, religion as well as natural history. This is I think the thing that most interests me and it is something which we don't often find in intellectual writing now, that ability to draw parallels, or discuss in depth issues outside of a certain subject matter. It reminds me a bit of the late Alistair Cook and his letters from America and these essays are mostly of about the same length.

This collection is 35 essays and collected into 10 loose sections. These include some interesting groupings which you would normally not expect from a natural scientist including Intellectual biography. His biography of Antoine Lavoisier is a case in point. Lavoissier, a renowned scientist of his time, was condemned to death at the guillotine during the French Revolution, and indeed was beheaded. Gould's biography manages to touch on the aspects of his life and death including the myths which remain on his last words and days, the attempted scientific restructuring of France by the revolutionaries (including new measurements and renaming of the months etc) and the revolution's final downfall, it turned out the revolution did need scientists after all.

There are essays on "kiwi eggs and the liberty Bell" or one of my favourites on Glow worms which uses the life of this insect to discuss our understanding of life processes of all insects - is the adult form the ultimate, or, like glowworms which are pupa, should we be reconsidering our adult-centric view of the natural world?

I really enjoy Gould's style, it is easy flowing prose and fairly straightforward to understand. There are a few concepts which I have to re-read to get the actual meaning as some of these issues are complex - the issue of probability in evolution vs creation for instance is complex and takes a bit of consideration from a non-mathematician.

I would certainly recommend this book for those who hold a creationist or intelligent design belief. This provides some fascinating points of discussion which may provide some counterpoint to the Intelligent Design assertions. Gould's letter to President Jimmy Carter and Carter's own respect for Gould would be of interest if nothing else.

This is not an easy thing to sit down and read at once, but it is wonderful to browse in and out of and skip back and forth through.

Bully for Brontosaurus, February 7, 2002
Stephen Jay Gould writes another volume of essays that are profound in scope. Trying to review essays in book form is difficult, but taking the task at hand, here is what I have to say.

These collected essays are enlightening and thought provoking. They vary in scope and content, but are always stimulating. The author has a knack for making the reader think, as I suppose all good professors should, a task well taken here.

The writing is easily followed and straight forward with a smattering of Gould's wit thrown in for spice. The authou's sense of humor is also apparent. The essays are educational, even as the author brings two apparently different articles and ties them together with a common thread.

I found a cornucopia of disparate objects that fueled my intellectual pleasure, as I read through the book. Anyone interested in Natural History or just curious about life should read this book.

The author's flowing writing style is evident, his teaching skills are there to enjoy and learn from.

Read and enjoy good writing.

Gould makes natural science a fun read., December 13, 2000
Gould makes clever analogies & comparisons of natural sciences with common things around us. Most of the topics he covered would be a bore to read by itself but Gould masterfully entertains & educates with his adroit prose & humorous side comments.

It is a bit on the long side and some of his comparisons used fads of the early 90's which are not relevant today; but all in all, the book is a winner.

Just plain good reading!, July 11, 1997
Stephen Jay Gould once again proves his amazing skill at presenting difficult scientific concepts in a clear, concise way. Eclectic, humorous, and always a chance to learn something new, Mr Gould's book is a refreshing look at everything around us. His insight into evolutionary concepts is profound, and it is a pleasure to read the work of someone who presents evolution as a fact -- something that most other authors (apparently including every science textbook writer in America) are too cowardly to do.

Mr. Gould deserves a score of 10 for this book, but I'm beginning to suspect that he's a Yankees fan, so I held one point back on principle. I look forward to hearing clarification from him on that sticky point.

Practice Makes (More Nearly) Perfect, March 9, 2001
This is the sixth of the collections of Gould's essays from the magazine Natural History. Gould has commented that, as he got better at essay writing, he found the earlier volumes less pleasing. Certainly, as he went along, he improved both in literary quality and in the depth of his treatment of issues. Gould is amusing, but always with a serious purpose: to educate the public about how science works, and how, often, it doesn't. In particular, the section of three essays gathered under the heading "Numbers and Probability" is very good at making one think about the real nature of "the odds."

Gooey Globs of the Great God Gould, June 21, 1997
The 20th century has produced 3 truly great science writers, professional scientists who are able to not only write well, and not only in their own particular fields, but in virtually all fields of science and culture. Two of those great writers, Isaac Asimov and Carl Sagan, are no longer among us. The third, Stephen Jay Gould, is. Gould is an eclectic writer and a true scholar, able to make virtually any subject not only accessible to the "average" reader, if there is any such animal, but also fascinating- if you have no interest in the subject of an essay when you begin reading, you will have an interest by the time you finish. Gould's essays wander far and wide across many fields of science, religion, literature, history and human nature, but all revolve around his one central passion- evolution, and how it effects EVERYTHING (earning for Gould the eternal contempt of Creationists.) If I could recommend the works of only two writers from whom you would be allowed to gain an understanding of the world, Stephen Jay Gould would be one of them (and Joseph Campbell the other

Needs editing, September 7, 1999
I enjoyed several of the essays in this book. To me, they were fresh and insightful and interesting reading.

Then I got to read another essay on the same topic, then another. The organization of the book is such that reading it straight through bored me to death.

Gould could stand to edit some of these roundabout tales down and get to the point a little quicker. The thoughts are thoroughly interesting, but they are buried in long-winded prose.

A readable natural science book, April 25, 1999
This is a fascinating book. Who knew you could actually read about science and like it (and laugh too). It's also informative. Great. ... Read more

Editorial Review

One of America's most respected and celebrated writers provides a thought-provoking analysis of, and a concise rebuttal of, E. O. Wilson's Consilience

"[A] scathing assessment...Berry shows that Wilson's much-celebrated, controversial pleas in Consilience to unify all branches of knowledge is nothing more than a fatuous subordination of religion, art, and everything else that is good to science...Berry is one of the most perceptive critics of American society writing today."-Lauren F. Winner, Washington Post Book World

"I am tempted to say he understands [Consilience] better than Wilson himself...A new emancipation proclamation in which he speaks again and again about how to defy the tyranny of scientific materialism."-Colin C. Campbell, Christian Science Monitor

"Berry takes a wrecking ball to E. O. Wilson's Consilience, reducing its smug assumptions regarding the fusion of science, art, and religion to so much rubble."-Kirkus Reviews

In Life Is a Miracle, the devotion of science to the quantitative and reductionist world is measured against the mysterious, qualitative suggestions of religion and art. Berry sees life as the collision of these separate forces, but without all three in the mix we are left at sea in the world. ... Read more

Editorial Review

Edited by Pulitzer Prize-winning New York Times columnist and bestselling author Natalie Angier, The Best American Science Writing 2009 collects into one volume the premier science writing of the year. Distinguished by new and impressive voices as well as some of the foremost names in science writing—Oliver Sacks and Atul Gawande among them—this anthology provides a comprehensive overview of where science has taken us—and where it is headed.

Editorial Review

Editorial Review

With sales of well over one million copies in North America alone, the commercial success of Gould's books now matches their critical acclaim. Reissued in a larger format, with a handsome new cover, The Panda's Thumb will introduce a new generation of readers to this unique writer, who has taken the art of the scientific essay to new heights. Illustrations. ... Read more